oops

[git.ikiwiki.info.git] / doc / todo / ACL.mdwn

diff --git a/doc/todo/ACL.mdwn b/doc/todo/ACL.mdwn
index e9fb2717f10d4f6edd18fd1175d8eac763effcdf..dd97932335a293524d6f72b9f94068c1e4aca6ad 100644 (file)
--- a/doc/todo/ACL.mdwn
+++ b/doc/todo/ACL.mdwn
@@ -21,6 +21,11 @@ something, that I think is very valuable.
 >>>> Which would rule out openid, or other fun forms of auth. And routing all access
 >>>> through the CGI sort of defeats the purpose of ikiwiki. --[[Ethan]]
 
 >>>> Which would rule out openid, or other fun forms of auth. And routing all access
 >>>> through the CGI sort of defeats the purpose of ikiwiki. --[[Ethan]]
 

+>>>>> I think what Joey is suggesting is to use apache ACLs in conjunction
+>>>>> with basic HTTP auth to control read access, and ikiwiki can use the
+>>>>> information via the httpauth plugin for other ACLs (write, admin). But
+>>>>> yes, that would rule out non-httpauth mechanisms. -- [[Jon]]
+

 Also see [[!debbug 443346]].
 
 > Just a few quick thoughts about this:
 Also see [[!debbug 443346]].
 
 > Just a few quick thoughts about this:


@@ -69,3 +74,25 @@ Here is how I see it:
     <pre>
     \[[!acl user=* page=/subsite/* acl=/subsite/acl.mdwn]]
     </pre>
     <pre>
     \[[!acl user=* page=/subsite/* acl=/subsite/acl.mdwn]]
     </pre>

+
+Any idea when this is going to be finished?  If you want, I am happy to beta test.
+
+> It's already done, though that is sorta hidden in the above. :-)
+> Example of use to only allow two users to edit the tipjar page:
+>      locked_pages => 'tipjar and !(user(joey) or user(bob))',
+> --[[Joey]] 
+
+> > Thank you for the hint but I am being still confused (read: dense)...  What I am trying to do is this:
+
+> >  * No anonymous access.
+> >  * Logged in users can edit and create pages.
+> >  * Users can set who can edit their pages. 
+> >  * Some pages are only viewable by admins. 
+
+> > Is it possible?  If so how?...
+
+>>> I don't believe this is currently possible. What is missing is the concept
+>>> of page 'ownership'. -- [[Jon]]
+
+>>>> GAH! That is really a shame... Any chance of adding that?  No, I do not really expect it to be added, after all my requirements are pushing the boundary of what a wikiwiki
+ should be.  Nonetheless, thanks for your help!