From: Joey Hess Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 01:24:20 +0000 (-0500) Subject: response X-Git-Url: https://scripts.mit.edu/gitweb/www/ikiwiki.git/commitdiff_plain/2767c808900d9b4e9ab689d4b9ad3945beecef3c response --- 2767c808900d9b4e9ab689d4b9ad3945beecef3c diff --cc doc/bugs/anonok_vs._httpauth.mdwn index 66a68032f,8cebfec90..1bf9a3750 --- a/doc/bugs/anonok_vs._httpauth.mdwn +++ b/doc/bugs/anonok_vs._httpauth.mdwn @@@ -36,12 -36,6 +36,12 @@@ and a whitelist of OpenIDs in `locked_p >>> would never see the Signin form. --[[Joey]] >>>> Would I be able to do what I want with a local plugin that - >>>> knows my auth requirements and abuses canedit -- e.g., if the page - >>>> matches */Discussion, redirect to Signin form, else httpauth? --[[schmonz]] + >>>> abuses canedit (and auth) to reach in and call the appropriate + >>>> plugin's auth method -- e.g., if the page matches */Discussion, + >>>> call `openid:auth()`, else `httpauth:auth()`? --[[schmonz]] + - >>>>> If you wanted users to need to login with openid or passwordauth - >>>>> for discussion pages, you could do that. That seems it would be - >>>>> annoying for httpauth users (who were not current authed) though, - >>>>> as they would then see the openid signin form. - >>>>> ++>>>>> That seems it would be ++>>>>> annoying for httpauth users (who were not currently authed), ++>>>>> as they would then see the openid signin form when going to edit a ++>>>>> Discussion page. +>>>>> --[[Joey]]