On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 1:12 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dal...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On 27 June 2010 21:07, Rob Lanphier <ro...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > >On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dal...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> I suggest eliminating the option of review multiple > >> edits with a single click, unless they are all by the same user. [...] > >> Once you've done that, the issue you raise goes away. > > > > I think it actually gets worse. What should the reject button do in the > > case that the reviewer is looking at A1 and P1? > > It would function as "undo". In the event that the edit cannot be > undone, it fails gracefully. The software can't be expected to do > everything successfully. I had forgotten that "undo" might possibly actually do something useful in this context. That said, let's recap what has happened so far. You start with accepted revision A1, and have pending revisions P1, P2, and P3. Once the user rejects P1, lets assume that that creates a new pending revision P4 that is the result of that undo. Now what? If they then review the diff between P1 and P2, they might mistakingly accept P2, even though it still contains the delta between A1 and P1. We could ask them to review the diff between P1 and P4, but that's now an aggregate of the P1P2 delta and the P2P3 delta, sans the A1P1 delta. I just don't think there's a clean way to reject an intermediate pending revision. Accepting? Sure, wonderful, that will work well. There's a reasonably strong argument for encouraging acceptance of intermediate revisions as part of the review process (so long as it always involves comparison to the latest accepted revision). But encouraging undo on intermediate revisions leaves things in a really weird place. Rob _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
