[Phpwiki-talk] Re: User registration (was: PHPGW plugin)

[Seth C. <se...@eu...>]

> > Will do.  I think the PHP triad of Wiki/Nuke/Groupware will be a
> > killer combo.

> The one thing that bothers me about many of these tools is the lack of
> capability for combined registration / authentication.

The Wiki module that Olle wrote uses the existing Nuke login.
If not logged in, it's 'anonymous user' (settable), and he's going to
implement
the suggestion that if desired, you must login to edit.  Once logged in, it
uses your Nuke login as your userid, so I created a SethCohn login, and
it worked fine under RecentChanges.

> We need some
> kind of SQL based auth plugin that other packages can use optionally,
> (instead of their own built in auth table).  Ideally, the login ID
> used should be an email address, per Jacob Nielson's suggestion,
> because it's guaranteed to be unique, and easy to remember.

Doesn't need to nearly be so complex or reinvent the wheel.
Nuke works fine, and if you wanted to make Wiki a major part,
you could always add a check for WikiWord status
if you desired that.  (Nuke already checks for all sorts of things, like no
God/Root/Admin types names...)

If you want make something interoperable, look at how Nuke or GW do it, and
implement a similar scheme, so that an admin merely has to point the engine
to
the same database and it'll read the same users.

> Does anyone know of a project that is addressing this?  If not,
> perhaps we can think about it for the new auth features of PhpWiki?

I think it's already in the works with Jeff's recent cvs changes.

> Another fairly polished piece of php/MySQL code is phpBB, which I just
> installed for another site, and of course has its own auth system too.
> http://phpbb.com

This has been ported/modulized for Nuke.  It's a popular Nuke addon.
Thanks for pointing another case of the convergence.

I myself am running a Wiki with a lot of 'discussion' and feeling that Wiki
might be
the wrong medium for it.  Some users like the ability to edit, some don't.
But it's haphazard and not very 'clean' to read.  A good discussion board
would probably replace those sections of the Wiki. leaving the more Wiki
aligned pages to grow.