On Sun, May 20, 2007 17:36, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
> On Sun, May 20, 2007 at 05:23:56PM +0200, ThomasP wrote:
>> On Sun, May 20, 2007 16:10, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
>> (II):
>> > Another approach I could use is that pagelist and other functions
>> assume
>> > that a page has a password unless
On Sun, May 20, 2007 at 05:23:56PM +0200, ThomasP wrote:
> On Sun, May 20, 2007 16:10, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
> (II):
> > Another approach I could use is that pagelist and other functions assume
> > that a page has a password unless $page['=passwd']['read'] is explicitly
> > set to an empty stri
On Sun, May 20, 2007 16:10, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
> On Sun, May 20, 2007 at 04:00:07PM +0200, ThomasP wrote:
>> Ok, I can see now: it is an optimization for not having to look up for
>> every single user whether the page is read-allowed for him/her, but
>> rather
>> to decide by the once determ
On Sun, May 20, 2007 at 04:00:07PM +0200, ThomasP wrote:
> On Sun, May 20, 2007 14:35, ThomasP wrote:
> > But the question for me is how should I set
> > $page['=passwd'] such that in the end the behaviour of (:pagelist:) is
> > acceptable:
> >
> >if (!$page['=passwd']['read']) $opt['=protectsa
On Sun, May 20, 2007 14:35, ThomasP wrote:
> On Sat, May 19, 2007 20:26, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
>>> More critical are the two remaining fields. Therefore the question:
>>> what
>>> is the exact meaning of
>>>
>>> '=protectexclude' and
>>> '=protectsafe'
>>
>> These aren't fields of the $page arr
