Thread:Talk:Requests for comment/Page protection as a component/Moving features to extension only as a means to extend them?/reply

Dantman, You're correct that extracting functionality into an extension is not required. Componentization could be done within core, although I haven't seen any good arguments in favor of that. The built-in protection model is certainly not universal -- see the proliferation of User Rights extensions. Also, bundling extensions with core has been the norm since MW 1.18, I'm not advocating shipping with protection totally disabled. My instinct to extensionize is probably motivated by ignorance and prejudice, although it does seem to be supported by the trends in other open-source projects, among which core functionality is being consistently reduced and divided into decoupled components.

I do strongly agree with your point that potential improvements to the protection model should be distributed by default so that all users benefit.

Thank you for this input, I'll try to update the RFC to disentangle the extension vs. component facet of the debate. Honestly, this is very secondary to the main thrust of the work I hope to complete, and I would be perfectly happy if page protection remained in core, as long as the implementation is flexible and clear.

Unfortunately, far-reaching changes within core will be impeded by inertia.