Anope IRC Services

Anope Development => Feature Requests => Topic started by: MeiR on June 02, 2009, 06:49:17 PM

Title: Nick argument to /cs owner & /cs deowner ?
Post by: MeiR on June 02, 2009, 06:49:17 PM

I wonder why can't founders put\remove owner mode on\from others, through ChanServ.
Security reasons maybe? It isn't an extra privilege I think, since mode +q can simply be put instead from ircd.

Title: Re: Nick argument to /cs owner & /cs deowner ?
Post by: Naram Qashat on June 02, 2009, 09:05:31 PM

Yes, it's for security reasons.  This probably won't be changed even when we have multiple founder support, unless someone has a really, really good reason for a change.

Title: Re: Nick argument to /cs owner & /cs deowner ?
Post by: MeiR on June 02, 2009, 09:11:25 PM

but what are the reasons?
It's excatly as /cs protect.
so what if +q is the highest level?
as i said, it can simply put with ircd rawmode.

Title: Re: Nick argument to /cs owner & /cs deowner ?
Post by: Amanda Folson on June 02, 2009, 09:15:01 PM

But setting +q on someone isn't quite the same as founder. Having +q wouldn't enable them to mess with the channel settings while being a true founder would.

Title: Re: Nick argument to /cs owner & /cs deowner ?
Post by: MeiR on June 02, 2009, 09:20:11 PM

That's also what i said in my post, Amanda.
Read carefully ;]
I meant only putting +q on a nick, same as "/cs protect | op | halhop | voice #chan nick"

Edit: Ah, u replied to Naram Qashat, sorry :)

Title: Re: Nick argument to /cs owner & /cs deowner ?
Post by: djGrrr on June 03, 2009, 03:52:23 AM

I would really like to see this feature in anope 1.9, there is is absolutely no reason not to have the owner mode (+q) be just as standard as any of the others, with AUTOOWNER OWNER and OWNERME access levels and such, default of being disabled of course but still there.

This is not to be confused with the founder, only the true founder can make any changes to the channel (unless of course the SET level is changed). Not having this does not increase security in the slightest bit, to think that is totally naive. The +q channel mode does not give users some superpowers or something, its simply another level of op separation, which is always useful.

It doesn't make sense to have to use a module (which is basically just a hack) to do something that clearly should be part of the core and is a very very simple thing to add.

Title: Re: Nick argument to /cs owner & /cs deowner ?
Post by: Charles Kingsley on June 05, 2009, 04:11:06 PM

I'm inclined to agree really as +q does not mean founder, perhaps up until now it's been badly branded as that.

I would see this as a further extension to the Access Levels system which is put in to make the managing access less blunt than xOP.