Last modified: 2012-06-02 18:05:29 UTC
The current situation is that all CU logs are together. Every user with CU access on any wiki can view the whole log of every wiki. I guess it would be better to let the CU's on the specific projects only have access to the log that shows only the CU-actions of that specific project. Not of the other projects. The other part of the request is that stewards have through meta access to the combined log of all CU-actions. (as it is now available on every single wiki). <this is a spin off from bug 8705, per request of rob.
Global logs are both useful in tracking and collaborating on crosswiki vandals/banned users (and note that stewards are not intended to become checkusers on wikis with local checkusers already, so such crosswiki coordination *needs* to be done be the local checkusers, not just stewards) as well as increasing transparency and accountability among the class of users already trusted with such confidential information, especially since many wikis have only two checkusers. I agree that a local log would be useful for convenience's sake, and also hopefully for fixing display of local language settings (if not date, since that varies by user preference), and I'd prefer parallel global and local logs to a global log, but I also prefer a global log to a local log.
Indeed, if local logs are to be made, they will be nicely formated additions to the global log, as I see no need to get rid of the global log. Dates are all stored as the same format already for all checks (that was done in the last patch).
I too would hate to see loss of the global log functionality, with the increase in crosswiki vandalism and sockery, being able to search for users or IPs elsewhere (and finding out who is working the issue) is very useful. So I would oppose this as a replacement, but be OK with this as an additional sort of log. See also http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6053
*** Bug 11741 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Done in r29527.
I'd like to ask that this either be reopened (or marked as rejected), or a new bug opened to track the request for a global log, linked to here. Loss of global logging is significant impact to those CUs that perform crosswiki checks as many CUs have pointed out. This also means that stewards and ombudsmen have lost global log access, another drawback which will require significant amounts of permissions twiddling whenever checks need carrying out. It is my belief that Effie's view as stated in the original bug is a small minority. (discussion is ongoing on various lists)
(In reply to comment #6) > I'd like to ask that this either be reopened (or marked as rejected), or a new > bug opened to track the request for a global log, linked to here. Loss of > global logging is significant impact to those CUs that perform crosswiki checks > as many CUs have pointed out. This also means that stewards and ombudsmen have > lost global log access, another drawback which will require significant amounts > of permissions twiddling whenever checks need carrying out. It is my belief > that Effie's view as stated in the original bug is a small minority. > (discussion is ongoing on various lists) > See bug 13789.
