Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Feature: New player rank "tester" #3677

Closed
BarbzYHOOL opened this issue Nov 10, 2020 · 7 comments
Closed

Feature: New player rank "tester" #3677

BarbzYHOOL opened this issue Nov 10, 2020 · 7 comments
Labels

Comments

@BarbzYHOOL
Copy link
Member

BarbzYHOOL commented Nov 10, 2020

Describe your feature request or suggestion in detail

A new rank in the core, and in the tables realmlist and account_access.
The rank would be number 1 and then we'd have to move all the other ranks by 1 up.

Current common.h:

enum AccountTypes
{
    SEC_PLAYER         = 0,
    SEC_MODERATOR      = 1,
    SEC_GAMEMASTER     = 2,
    SEC_ADMINISTRATOR  = 3,
    SEC_CONSOLE        = 4                                  // must be always last in list, accounts must have less security level always also
};

New:

enum AccountTypes
{
    SEC_PLAYER                 = 0,
    SEC_TESTER                 = 1,
    SEC_MODERATOR         = 2,
    SEC_GAMEMASTER      = 3,
    SEC_ADMINISTRATOR   = 4,
    SEC_CONSOLE              = 5
};

So why?

Well when you have a dev realm, you might want to allow only certain accounts on that server. Actually we have to block ALL players from entering, meaning we can't even test with normal player accounts unless we edit the realmlist table and reboot authserver and worldserver (annoying and rank 0 players can now enter, which is unwanted).

Also we could simply set a tester rank for players of our choice to test on our dev realm (or dedicated test realm).

Note: never really understand the rank "moderator" but i guess it's like a new GM.

Additional context

To convert current ranks in the DB, it can probably be handled smoothly with queries.
Also, MAYBE, need to update the default accounts and set "test9" and "test10" to rank 1 probably (and move all the other ranks by one up?)


Want to back this issue? Post a bounty on it! We accept bounties via Bountysource.

@Racknar0
Copy link

Racknar0 commented Nov 11, 2020

I don't think it would be a good idea to make the core less compatible with FusionCMS/FusionGen , many people use AC because of its compatibility with the sites this would make people stop using the core and migrate to others because of incompatibility with these sites.

@BarbzYHOOL
Copy link
Member Author

In fact, i don't think it will break fusioncms cause if we keep the previous account_access to rank "console" then it will be fine as in fusioncms it uses the account name

@FALL1N1
Copy link
Contributor

FALL1N1 commented Nov 12, 2020

That's really unnecessary in my opinion, if someone wants it - they will simply add it.

@azerothcore azerothcore deleted a comment from Si1ker Nov 12, 2020
@BarbzYHOOL
Copy link
Member Author

That's really unnecessary in my opinion, if someone wants it - they will simply add it.

Like every feature, nothing is necessary and can be custom added. Less work for users is better, and it also avoids git conflicts when updating. What about the current subjective ranks we have? They lay the path for server owners, and it's fine (though one could argue that these should be configurable in DB directly instead and I agree with that)

This would allow for premium testers or people who would register to a beta test (or a PTR) through a special form on their website. It only gives more flexibility, more possibilities for little cost. I feel like I didn't explain it well in the first place :(

@FALL1N1
Copy link
Contributor

FALL1N1 commented Nov 12, 2020

Maybe backporting RBAC would be a better idea rather than playing with those values? In my opinion it is, also it's much better than the current implementation of security levels.

@BarbzYHOOL
Copy link
Member Author

ah maybe too (though slightly different subject), I really dunno how good RBAC is but it's prob a lot of work to port (meanwhile this could be added lol)

I think Deku had started the work on his fork long ago (he wanted to make it a module though, not sure why, maybe to avoid breaking changes)
no one else tried

@Kitzunu
Copy link
Member

Kitzunu commented Aug 25, 2021

Gonna close this in favor of RBAC #5704

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants