View Issue Details
|ID||Project||Category||View Status||Date Submitted||Last Update|
|0002198||unreal||ircd||public||2004-11-25 15:11||2005-02-12 19:03|
|Target Version||Fixed in Version||3.2.3|
|Summary||0002198: ~c extended ban type improvement|
|Description||It would be a nice thing to be able to specify a prefix for the ~c extended bantype. When a prefix is specified, users must have that status or higher on the channel. This would be a good thing to have for ban exceptions when op or voice is required on the target channel.|
mode #channel +be ~q:*!*@* ~c:+#unreal-support
Would requre users to be voice or higher on #unreal-support (or in #channel) to be able to talk in #channel.
|Tags||No tags attached.|
|3rd party modules|
[quote]mode #channel +be ~q:*!*@* ~c:+#unreal-support
Would requre users to be voice or higher on #unreal-support (or in #channel) to be able to talk in #channel.[/quote]
Maybe I'm wrong, but that's not how this would work, is it? Meaning, that +e ~c isn't linked to the +b ~q. ~c prevents you from joining, not from speaking. So if you did ~c:+#unreal-support, it would mean you must be +v on #unreal-support to join, not to talk. If you then came to #channel, then set -v in #unreal-support, it wouldn't care. Or is there some link between ~q and ~c that I'm not aware of?
At the moment (perhaps this should be documented):
~q: affects only messages
~n: affects only nickchanges
~r: affects ALL
~c: affects ALL
Currently unreal32docs is unclear, especially on ~r/~c:
~c channel If the user is in this channel then (s)he is unable to join. Ex: ~c:#lamers
should probably be:
~c channel If the user is in this channel then (s)he is banned. Ex: ~c:#lamers
[and same for ~r]
|Ok, makes more sense then.|
Added in .263 :).
I think the desynch it causes is acceptable.. +b/+e's with this prefix will simply be ignored on unsupported servers (and are correctly 'skipped', so +b-b ~c:+#chan some!existing@ban will show up as -b some!existing@ban).
And of course if this still bothers anyone he/she can temp. disable the c extban in the conf ;).
|2004-11-25 15:11||Stealth||New Issue|
|2004-11-25 16:41||syzop||Status||new => acknowledged|
|2004-11-29 18:48||syzop||Assigned To||=> syzop|
|2004-11-29 18:48||syzop||Summary||~c extended ban type => ~c extended ban type improvement|
||Note Added: 0008841|
|2005-01-17 17:13||syzop||Note Added: 0008843|
||Note Added: 0008857|
|2005-02-12 00:27||syzop||Status||acknowledged => assigned|
|2005-02-12 00:27||syzop||ETA||none => < 1 week|
|2005-02-12 19:03||syzop||Status||assigned => resolved|
|2005-02-12 19:03||syzop||Fixed in Version||=> 3.2.3|
|2005-02-12 19:03||syzop||Resolution||open => fixed|
|2005-02-12 19:03||syzop||Note Added: 0009109|