I am currently setting up RForum on a site where it is not useful to
allow guests to reply to topics or post new topics. Spam will be rife.
Consequently, I’ve added a configuration switch to the ‘site.rb’ file
and extended the various ‘…_permissions.rb’ model files with
“can_reply?” and “can_post?” methods which are always ‘true’ for normal
or admin users, but check the new configuration flag for guests.
I’d like to submit this for inclusion on the trunk but I’m not sure
where I should send the patch or what format it should be sent in. I did
e-mail the developers but after a couple of days I’ve not heard anything
- perhaps they’re busy, or perhaps I’m missing something obvious
In conjunction with the very useful recently posted
acts_as_authenticated patch I hope in due course to implement a “single
sign on” with captcha protection or similar. That’ll ensure that the
site’s wiki, blog and forum can only be used by registered “real humans”
rather than bots, but to minimise irritation they’ll only have to use
one set of login credentials (it seems I’ll need to extend both Typo and
Instiki to also only support authenticated write operations). If anyone
else has been working on similar problems I would be very interested to
hear about your approach.
As a side-issue, the extensive customisation of RForum that I’ve done
includes in passing a number of fixes for assumptions that RForum will
run in the document root. On my site, it has to coexist with Instiki,
Typo and other applications under the same virtual host, so rigorous use
of helper methods rather than hard-coded URLs is important. This is an
ongoing process as I discover other areas that need attention (URLs in
notification e-mail messages are still wrong, for example) but again, I
would like to submit these fixes for inclusion in the trunk once I’m
happy that they’re comprehensive and have completed proper testing.
So, any suggestions for RForum patch submission? TIA…