If you want to do this, then please assign this issue to yourself, and post updates and patches in this thread (not in the main d6 upgrade thread). Volunteer(s) wanted! Thanks.

Comments

falk_g’s picture

falk_g commented

May I ask if this is really needed? Shouldn´t category "see" the normal permissions set by any perm module - like the taxonomy access module? I know that category under D5 does not really adhere to the permissions set in the system on my install but I always thought of it as a bug in D5 (and I have been trying to fix it to no avail). Id rather see the core category module to adhere to the normal very good working perm modules then have a category add on but maybe you can explain why that would not work...

Jaza’s picture

Jaza commented

In my opinion, this module is not needed at all. To tell the truth, I've never used this module, or even looked once at its code (it's the only module in the category package for which I can say that). I certainly won't be porting it. This issue exists purely to cover the (unlikely) event of someone really deciding they want this module ported to D6, and assigning the task to themselves. Yes, the category module should adhere to regular node access permissions, as well as its own administrator permissions (which are modeled on the book / taxonomy admin perms). Don't worry about this module - I don't think it even got properly ported to D5, it's still probably compatible only with D4.7.

falk_g’s picture

falk_g commented

ok - cool just asking - btw it does work under D5 (for other people looking here). I tried it because normal access modules do not work with category and D5. But its really rubbish ;) interface wise and usage wise - very limited scope of functionality. I sincerely hope that taxonomy access works - as I think this is the way to go...