Thread: [Phpslash-devel] Re: user accounts
Brought to you by:
joestewart,
nhruby
From: Joe S. <joe...@us...> - 2002-11-13 15:31:04
|
Moved this portion from the -users list Since we haven't had much discussion of user accounts, this might be good. On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 12:14:45PM -0800, Seth Hall wrote: > > Hmm, I'm not following you here. Are you talking about the way that I'm > querying for the user name? I've noticed the migration to pulling the > commenter's name from the user account, but I've been keeping some > modifications for my site(where i don't plan on adding user accounts in > the same you you guys are). > You can still let users change the name in the comment form, the default value will be stuffed is all. Can you expand on what you're needing for user accounts? Or what you don't like now? > As an idea, the way that I'm going to implement user accounts on my site > is to give people the option to create an account, but the only thing that > it gives them is a way to leave leave a comment that everyone knows came > from that them. It'll just stop people from making comments as another > person. I think I'm going to just put a little icon beside their name in > the comment if the person is using an authenticated account and if other > people leave comments with that name, it will not have the icon so that > everyone will know that it was not the same person. Hmm... I think I'm > rambling. > Still thinking on this one... My thought was to not allow someone to change their name to an existing name. Either way there has to be a lookup to check the name against a username doesn't it? My way wouldn't allow a mismatch, yours would allow it, just not display an icon. Is that right? I'd like input from others on this too. thanks, Joe > I'll send an email here when/if I implement it so that you can see what > I'm talking about. > |
From: Seth H. <se...@re...> - 2002-11-14 05:31:52
|
On Wednesday, November 13, 2002, at 10:26 AM, Joe Stewart wrote: > > Since we haven't had much discussion of user accounts, this might be > good. > > On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 12:14:45PM -0800, Seth Hall wrote: >> >> Hmm, I'm not following you here. Are you talking about the way that >> I'm >> querying for the user name? I've noticed the migration to pulling the >> commenter's name from the user account, but I've been keeping some >> modifications for my site(where i don't plan on adding user accounts in >> the same you you guys are). >> > > You can still let users change the name in the comment form, the default > value will be stuffed is all. My thought was that if someone is authenticated it always has their user name in the form(no text box, like I think is in cvs now). If they want to leave a message under another name, they can deauthenticate and then post their message. On my site at least, I don't think that many people would ever want to post under a fake name. > Can you expand on what you're needing for user accounts? Or what you > don't like now? It just seems to me like phpslash is moving toward the other slashes in that in order to post a message, you must be authenticated. I don't want that on my site. I've run across too many sites where the only time I've visited the site, I wanted to leave a quite note, but didn't because they want you to create a user account(and of course I never want to :) I might be mistaken, it would be nice to have a clear plan set out to show everyone what features will and won't be included for user accounts and possibly even how everything will be implemented. >> As an idea, the way that I'm going to implement user accounts on my >> site >> is to give people the option to create an account, but the only thing >> that >> it gives them is a way to leave leave a comment that everyone knows >> came >> from that them. It'll just stop people from making comments as another >> person. I think I'm going to just put a little icon beside their name >> in >> the comment if the person is using an authenticated account and if >> other >> people leave comments with that name, it will not have the icon so that >> everyone will know that it was not the same person. Hmm... I think I'm >> rambling. >> > > Still thinking on this one... > > My thought was to not allow someone to change their name to an existing > name. change their name? Were you planning on using username for posts or Real name? hmm... Maybe make it configurable. There could be an option to use usernames or real names site wide. Like when people post articles or comments. That would be a good one. > > Either way there has to be a lookup to check the name against a username > doesn't it? My way wouldn't allow a mismatch, yours would allow it, > just > not display an icon. Is that right? Yeah, the way I'm describing would allow an anonymous visitor to come to a site that has user accounts enabled and leave a post(even as an already registered name) and there wouldn't be any confusion as to whether the person with the account left the comment or not because that user would not have the icon or however a registered user is denoted. As far as I know, that is different from all the other slashes. Slashdot actually forces you to authenticate before leaving a message. Another thought I just had was with comment list breaking. Sometime soon I should really add some code that will break apart a list of comments into smaller chunks. I have an article at my site that has gotten way more comments than any article on my site rightfully deserves :) The page is just getting waayyyy too big (~500k) http://www.remor.com/article.php3?story_id=798&story_id=798#3461 I still need to sit down and think about how to handle that though. Oh, and something else I just thought of... If you notice on my site, I have ip or hostnames displayed for each of the comments. When not logged in with access to edit comments(I think), you only see part of the host name, but when logged in with correct permissions, you can see the entire ip/hostname. If you're interested, I can whip up a patch sometime for that stuff. too late.. .Seth |
From: Joe S. <joe...@us...> - 2002-11-14 17:16:09
|
Thanks for the greate input. I've snipped a bunch to make this shorter. On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 12:31:48AM -0500, Seth Hall wrote: > > My thought was that if someone is authenticated it always has their user > name in the form(no text box, like I think is in cvs now). It can be either way, with a text box or without. Either way the data is pulled from there record. With a text box, they can change it. > If they want > to leave a message under another name, they can deauthenticate and then > post their message. Interesting. I believe you can do this now. I think many sites might be the other way around - anon can't change the name but authed users can. > On my site at least, I don't think that many people > would ever want to post under a fake name. > Some sites have a real problem with people being able to post as others. > > > Can you expand on what you're needing for user accounts? Or what you > > don't like now? > > It just seems to me like phpslash is moving toward the other slashes in > that in order to post a message, you must be authenticated. I don't > want that on my site. I've run across too many sites where the only > time I've visited the site, I wanted to leave a quite note, but didn't > because they want you to create a user account(and of course I never > want to :) > This has always been my big argument whether user accounts were needed for many applications. Most sites are attempting to attract people and creating a barrier to use hinders this. phpSlash should have the flexibility to do whichever method is needed. I guess following the idea of least surprise, the default install should allow changing your name when anonymous? It already allows anonymous posting. > change their name? Were you planning on using username for posts or > Real name? hmm... Maybe make it configurable. There could be an option > to use usernames or real names site wide. Like when people post > articles or comments. That would be a good one. Real Name for now. I've been trying to work this out. Here's a snippet of another email: -- In the current cvs by default the comment poster's name and url come from their author data. Right now the Real Name is used. I believe that which field used should be either a config variable, a user choice, or a new field such as "display name". How do yall think this should be handled? -- A little help here would be appreciated. > I might be mistaken, it would be nice to have a clear plan set out to > show everyone what features will and won't be included for user accounts > and possibly even how everything will be implemented. > True. There has been very little feedback on the direction taken for now. Most of the work done has been to attach permissions to actions. So a site administrator can group the permissions as needed - sort of pick and choose. This is a little different than site-wide config variables but should allow the kind of flexibility needed long term. So if anyone doesn't like how things work, please speak up. The cvs code sometimes has expiremental code for testing. Also feel free to add more feature requests or add comments to existing requests. > > Yeah, the way I'm describing would allow an anonymous visitor to come to > a site that has user accounts enabled and leave a post(even as an > already registered name) and there wouldn't be any confusion as to > whether the person with the account left the comment or not because that > user would not have the icon or however a registered user is denoted. > > As far as I know, that is different from all the other slashes. > Slashdot actually forces you to authenticate before leaving a message. > sounds pretty good. > Another thought I just had was with comment list breaking. Sometime > soon I should really add some code that will break apart a list of > comments into smaller chunks. I have an article at my site that has > gotten way more comments than any article on my site rightfully > deserves :) The page is just getting waayyyy too big (~500k) > > http://www.remor.com/article.php3?story_id=798&story_id=798#3461 > yes, when a poll is busy and gets a ton of comments, it makes a large load. We had to move to Threaded comments on one site because of this. Ah, notice your link? It's got the story_id twice, like I was talking about before. > I still need to sit down and think about how to handle that though. > > Oh, and something else I just thought of... > If you notice on my site, I have ip or hostnames displayed for each of > the comments. When not logged in with access to edit comments(I think), > you only see part of the host name, but when logged in with correct > permissions, you can see the entire ip/hostname. If you're interested, > I can whip up a patch sometime for that stuff. > yes, please. Phorum has this capability. We had complaints to remove it from public viewing because some people post from work and don't want that host showing up. thanks, Joe > too late.. > .Seth > |
From: Seth H. <se...@re...> - 2002-11-14 17:54:50
|
On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, Joe Stewart wrote: > > http://www.remor.com/article.php3?story_id=798&story_id=798#3461 > > Ah, notice your link? It's got the story_id twice, like I was talking > about before. Before, I didn't understand what you were saying, but just after I sent this email I noticed that the link I used had that, and suddenly remembered thinking about that when I first wrote the comment block, but it was a while ago and I forgot about the problem because hey! It worked on my site and that's all that I needed. ;) I guess I need to update my copy now :) I think there was some other stuff I wanted to comment on, but I'm in a lab right now and need to get back to work. I'll send another email later. later, .Seth |