Closed (duplicate)
Project:
Mollom
Version:
6.x-1.4
Component:
Code
Priority:
Normal
Category:
Feature request
Assigned:
Reporter:
Created:
28 Sep 2010 at 15:49 UTC
Updated:
23 May 2011 at 17:51 UTC
Jump to comment: Most recent file
It would be nice to have more fine grained control of the reputation model we wish to use ( Mollom documentation reference: http://mollom.com/api/checkContent ). This will allow us to use different reputation models on a per-form basis depending on our needs.
| Comment | File | Size | Author |
|---|---|---|---|
| #1 | mollom-925346.patch | 7.18 KB | Souvent22 |
Comments
Comment #1
Souvent22 commentedProposed patch is attached. This allows one to set a "global" reputation model that is used by default; further it allows one to configure a reputation model to use on a per-form basis. By default, no reputation is sent in which mollom uses it's own current default reputation model.
Comment #2
Souvent22 commentedUpdating the status to "needs review"
Comment #3
Souvent22 commentedWrong branch number. :). This patch is off the 1.14 branch.
Comment #5
sunHm. This requires some user interface/experience considerations, as it's a level of detail that most users most probably don't care for. I don't think that users will understand the meaning of the option labels, so those would have to be rewritten in a human-readable style.
Furthermore, although it is technically the proper location, I wonder whether this needs to be configured per form, or whether we could bury that setting into the global settings form and apply it to all forms.
Need to check back with Dries on this. Adjusting version for testing purposes only. New features go into the D7 version first.
Comment #6
sun#1: mollom-925346.patch queued for re-testing.
Comment #8
Souvent22 commentedSun, agreed. If there was a way to hook into the mollom submission before it gets sent, I would have abstracted this out to a separate module; however, currently there is not; so perhaps the better solution here is to make the submission to mollom more extensible?
Regarding the UX; if there was an explanation "It is usually best to leave this to the default Mollom reputation model..." so users knew to usually ignore this?
Side note: Should I do my patches from the module root, or the drupal root? Test bot seems to have trouble finding the files.
Comment #9
Souvent22 commentedAnd I agree;I struggled with how to best "describe" the labels.
Comment #10
sunThanks for your work on this, @Souvent22.
The Mollom team decided to deprecate that complex reputation model parameter, and rather extract it into multiple individual parameters.
The first one, 'strictness', has been added via #1111378: Minimum post interval and text analysis strictness options
Some more are going to follow very soon.