[imc-uk-emergency] correction on summary & further irc chatting

[ana]

sorry i forgot from the summary 

7. every body happy not to have a trash bin, i.e. a
page with only hidden postings. it would be an archive
for nazis. So, proposal to have one page with all
postings, hidden mixed with not hidden, and if people
want to see them they need to see editorial guidelines
first.

Also, correction about london: it 'is' also prepared
to go live, alongside with oxford and the others
(although, to be discussed if london collective wants
to go up with mir with london page).

there is an issue not considered in these chats so far
(well we talked about it informally and this is the
'report back' - at end of this mail are the logs)

It's the question about passwords

now there is only one site - uk, and only one password
- every admin person has the same password - because
there is only one administration page.
 
For mir, a better user accounts system is planned, and
actually in lancaster it was proposed that each task
would work with a different password/permission.
Although it would create hierarchies, it looks
practical... what is important is that we reach a
decision on the 'model of passwords'. ideally this
decision should be made before the launch but then it
would take us ages to reach one. once we reach a
decision of this, the coder/s can set up whatever we
decide.



Options (things that are possible) (to note that some
of these things are only possible with techie help
outside UK):

- each person can have one account, with user name and
password but with same permissions. 
- we can have different permissions for different
roles: If we want different permissions, then users
roles could be limited by what topics and types they
can create, edit and delete. so person "x" would only
give acces to regional page "y", for instance.
- histories can be attached to items so that who does
what is logged
- these histories could be make not-public
- histories could include details like "user x
promoted feature y to startpage on 30.5.03"



Things to decide...

1. do we want one password/permission for all admin
work or different?

2. if we want different permission for different roles
- what roles administrators have - who is doing what:
admin of each local site, admin of page, hiding of
postings...

Schematical time line:

0. we start collecting stuff for the sheffield agenda
-  what will need to be decided there
1. we go live on mir 
2. we do a wish lists about passwords, permissions...
3. at the sheffield meeting, we:
 - do an evaluation on mir, as proposed
 - establish what we want passwords for


logs
=============================================
<ana>	have you lot ever talked about passwords?
<ana>	i mean, now there is only one site - uk
<ana>	and only one password - every admin person has
the same password - well it's only one admin page
innit
<chrisc> yes
<ana> yes?
<chrisc> Zapata has said that a better user accounts
system is planned
<ana> aha
<chrisc> and he would like input from us on it's
design
<ana> so we should talk about it 'before' the mir
launch!
<chrisc> well there is nothing we can do about it in
the short term...
<ionnek> chris: what sort of design input can we give
him?
<chrisc> what roles users have
<ionnek> users = admins?
<chrisc> yes
<ana> uufff i see having to sort out who's doing what
first
<ana> like - is there a 'no regions?' who's doing it?
who's doing front page?
<ana> same password to propose features than to hide
postings?
<ana> stuff like that, no?
<chrisc> yes
<ana> i think this should be sorted out before the
launch
<ionnek> a different pw for each regional page?
<ana> we need passwords in order to admin!
<chrisc> well i don't think mir supports that yet...
<ionnek> ana  - if we want to launch after thats
sorted, we can wait for a long while...
<ana> what!!
<ana> so how do we sort this out!
<chrisc> we can all have different accounts
<ana> oooohhhhh!!! panic!!!!!
<chrisc> but we will all have the same permissons
<chrisc> to do anythink
<ionnek> what is an account?
<chrisc> username / passwd pair
<ionnek> so - presently, we have one account that
gives access to everything - like on old page?
<chrisc> yes
<ionnek> tha 
<chrisc> but we can have multiple accounts
<ionnek> ...to do what?
<chrisc> all can do everything
<chrisc> well we would need to get the mir programmers
to do that...
<ana> we need to change that
<ana> in lancaster... (sorry to bang about this all
the time)
<ana> we decided that each 'page' would have a
different password
<ana> thing is, there are strange issues with the
password now
<chrisc> it will have to work on topics or types
<ana> on regions?
<chrisc> what issues?
<ionnek> hmm - it's all very nice to make decisions -
but what if these things don't exist?
<ionnek> was there also a decision about a deadline?
<ana> issues: i've publish articles some times, and
the second after they were hidden
<ana> for no reason - it was a protest, or sth
<ana> this has happened to other people, too
<ionnek> published on features?
<ionnek> or on nw
<ana> no, on newswire
<ana> it would be too obvious and prominent on
features
<chrisc> users roles could be limited by what topics
and types they can create, edit and delete, i can't
think how else it 

would be done
<ionnek> so pw "x" would only give acces to regional
page "y"?
<ana> ionnek: that was the idea in lancaster
<ana> another issue is if it's possible
<chrisc> we sould also have histories attached to
items so that who does what is logged
<ana> chrisc: a BRILLIANT idea
<ionnek> ana - I'm asking about what's possible, not
so much what is desirable...
<ana> yes i understand...
<chrisc> they might be the same thing ;-)
<ionnek> cool
<ana> chris - yes but we need to check with techies
(you included innit) frst
<ionnek> we sould also have histories attached to
items so that who does what is logged - 
<ana> ionnek - the thing with that is...
<ana> legal responsibility...
<chrisc> well we will only be able to make feature
requests to the coders...
* ionnek listening
<ana> what'dyou mean chris?
<chrisc> histories of items would not need to be made
public
<chrisc> oh, hang on...
<chrisc> none of us in the uk can add features to mir
<chrisc> we can only customise it in limited ways
<chrisc> like structurs of the site and templates for
the pages
* ana asking to please explain
<chrisc> the software is written in java
<[machine]> chrisc: no tame java techies?
<chrisc> we don't know java, apart from machine
<chrisc> we can ask people on #mir to help
<chrisc> Zapata is interested in helping
<chrisc> but we first need to decide what features we
want/need
<ana> for what is help needed? what things can't be
done by you lot?
<chrisc> the whole permissions system can't be done by
us
<ana> the passwords stuff? the history logs? the
access to history logs? everything?
<chrisc> everything
<ionnek> history: it would include details like "user
ionnek promoted feature x to startpage on 30.5.03" ?
<chrisc> yes something like that, if we want it
<ana> in summary:
<ana> we go live on mir
<ana> at same time we do a wish lists on the issues
mentioned here
<ana> at the sheff. meeting, we:
<ana> 1. evaluate how it went
<ana> 2. establish what passwords we want for admins,
and etc
<ana> right?
<chrisc> yeah
<ionnek> 1. should be more detailed
<ionnek> 2. maybe "what we want passwords for"
<ionnek> because I'm sure we'll meet looooads of
confusion...
<ana> yes this was just a 'time line' about what can
be done at what moment
<ana> this shold go on lists
<ana> i think
<ionnek> maybe we could start collecting stuff for the
sheffield agenda on twiki
<ionnek> when they finished moving their server
<ionnek> and also add explanations and documenationd
about all the stuff we need to decide!
<ionnek> or better... discuss...
<ana> i'm going to post andy's summary now...
<chrisc> actually i think admin permissions will be
not too hard to design
<ionnek> ... but what sort of info would they/you need
from us?
<ionnek> There might be several levels of pwds
<ionnek> or accounts
<ionnek> like one for EVERYTHING, 
<chrisc> yes, based on types and topics
<ionnek> thats the kings'n queens
<ionnek> then the ones for topics, the ministers
<ionnek> then one for only nw cleaning, for the slaves
;-)
<ionnek> the pw thing could create a massive hierachy,
fictional or real - i think
<ionnek> ... not that I'm against several accounts. 
<chrisc> we will all have accounts
<chrisc> no need to share them...?
<ionnek> what will these accounts to allow us to do?
* ionnek is a bit slow today
<chrisc> well the kings and queens could regenerate
all the static pages
<chrisc> admin other accounts permissions
<chrisc> perhaps set topics and types
<chrisc> that kind of superuser stuff
<chrisc> like root
<ionnek> set - thats different from "maintain"?
<chrisc> yes
<ionnek> k
<chrisc> add to the list of types
<chrisc> then we could have editors
<chrisc> whit permissions limited perhaps by types and
topics
<chrisc> ie can only edit sheffield features
<chrisc> not london ones
<[machine]> hmm
<chrisc> then we could have moderators
<chrisc> machine, go ahead :-)
<[machine]> nah, was just thinking the account admin
stuff reminded me of work
* chrisc me too...
* chrisc with free software work is play...
<[machine]> well, what ever system is designed will be
better than Tivoli Devolved Admin
<chrisc> i would like lots of moderators
<chrisc> i would like users to have accounts if they
want 
<ionnek> "users" - nw posters?
<chrisc> and users with accounts who post good stuff
can be given moderator status
<ionnek> ah
<chrisc> we could also all stuff to be modded up
<chrisc> and users could set what level of stuff they
see
<chrisc> like hide all the crap
<chrisc> or show it all
<chrisc> or only the good stuff

===============================
(conversation went on to other topics, to get complete
logs of friday 16th May just mail emergency list, some
one will have them).


=====
Bypass the Corporate Media  Machine: http://www.indymedia.org
Pasa de la máquina mediática. Y del mensaje de abajo.

___________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - Nueva versión GRATIS
Super Webcam, voz, caritas animadas, y más...
http://messenger.yahoo.es