Hi Brynn,
On Sun, 2017-03-26 at 07:40 -0600, brynn wrote:
But there does seem to be some functionality, which has been planned for, but not actually functioning yet, to allow for resource uploads to be approved. Maren says that we have 2 database fields, called 'checked_by' (person) and 'checked_sig' (person's signature), which are specifically created for approving uploads. She suggests making a bug/wishlist report to request these fields be defined (and made functional). I would suggest attaching them to the Inkscape User account (or some other account which can be used for this). And then we would just give people who are interested in vetting tutorials (or other resources), access to that account. So question for Martin. Before I make the bug report, is there some reason why it would be a waste of time for tutorials?
I'm a little unsure of the question. But I'm going to try and answer what I think the question is:
checked_by is a user object, checked sig is a gpg signature against the content. A bug report asking that all moderators be allowed to "check" any resource would be a very good idea and I imagine it being a fairly high priority as it allows us to enable a useful feature.
Hope this helps!
Best Regards, Martin Owens
Could this be done before the forum issue is settled? Because if not, by then I'll be able to start on the vetting process that I've already been planning (see link to bug report above). But if it could be done before then, then other people could start vetting tutorials that I might not have even seen yet. (I've been putting off my twice yearly update of that page, while working on the new forum issue. So certainly there are plenty I haven't seen yet.) Or is there some other reason why this plan would not work? Or should something else be included in the report (in case I'm not understanding something correctly?
Thanks for any comments, brynn