1
0
mirror of https://github.com/Uberi/Minetest-WorldEdit.git synced 2024-11-16 07:30:17 +01:00
Minetest-WorldEdit/worldedit_protection/init.lua

148 lines
6.6 KiB
Lua
Raw Normal View History

2014-04-16 22:35:46 +02:00
--if there's no protection mod, no worldedit means no editing, worldedit means editing anywhere (old behaviour)
--if there's a protection mod (and it's creative mode), no worldedit means editing only in your area, worldedit means editing in no-man's land too, and areas means editing anywhere.
2014-04-16 22:35:46 +02:00
--let the other mod load first
minetest.after(0, function()
--I would use mod.soft_depend from commonlib, but there are multiple mods that could create owned land
PROTECTION_MOD_EXISTS = minetest.is_protected == old_is_protected
--else fall back to old behaviour, where
--worldedit privilege is permission to edit everything
end)
--[[
worldedit.privs replaces privs = {worldedit = true}, and also helps bypass volume permission checks.
Usage:
In chatcommand:
privs = {}
func = worldedit.privs(function(name, param)...end)
In if statement:
name = minetest.get_player_name(node)
if worldedit.privs() then
Returns:
nil ( false) for no permission to worldedit anywhere,
1 ( true ) for permission to worldedit at least somewhere, and
2 (extra true ) for worldediting everywhere without checking for further permission.
--]]
--I wanted this function to directly choose the privileges for the chat command, but it only applies once.
--privs={worldedit=true [, server=true]}
--privs={worldedit=worldedit.priv() [, server=true]}
--instead, I had to wrap the rest of func = .
worldedit.privs = function(--[[name, ]]privsfunc--[[, param]])
--This runs a function for a chatcommand's func = ,
--or it can be used directly in an if statement.
if privsfunc == nil then
privsfunc = function(name, param) end
end
2014-04-17 21:35:15 +02:00
--this silly syntax was copied from safe_region, which is actually executed on chatcommand registration, and must return a function instead of the result of a function.
--The innermost anonymous function is declared. Then safe_region executes, adding a function wrapper around that function. Then worldedit.privs gets that as an argument, and adds another wrapper. The doubly-wrapped function is the one registered as a chatcommand.
return function(name, param)
if minetest.check_player_privs(name, {areas=true}) then
--You can set areas, so you are allowed to worldedit them too.
--The ability to set the whole world as owned by yourself is already potentially destructive, what's more destructive capability?
privsfunc(name, param)
return 2 --edit everywhere without checks
elseif not minetest.setting_getbool("creative_mode") or not PROTECTION_MOD_EXISTS then
2014-04-17 21:35:15 +02:00
--no protection mod, or not the kind of world where people can just create nodes out of thin air,
--worldedit privilege means editing anywhere
if minetest.check_player_privs(name, {worldedit=true}) then
privsfunc(name, param)
return 2 --edit everywhere without checks
2014-04-17 21:35:15 +02:00
else
--func(name, param) placeholder
return nil --edit nowhere
2014-04-17 21:35:15 +02:00
end
else
2014-04-17 21:35:15 +02:00
--protection mod, can edit inside your area without worldedit privilege
--(worldedit and areas let you edit in no-man's land and other-owned area)
privsfunc(name, param)
return 1 --edit at least somewhere, with checks
end
2014-04-16 22:35:46 +02:00
end
end
--this is... within chatcommands that actually change land
--(should be the same functions as safe_region)
--also check for permission when region is set? no, //stack goes outside the boundaries.
--so the region is defined per-command on exec.
--//move has disconnected sections, so it's passed as a list of points.
--which are deduplicated.
worldedit.can_edit_volume = function(--[[name, ]]volume, volfunc--[[, param]])
--volume is before func, unlike safe_region having func before count
--because func may be removed to have can_edit_volume in an if statement
--like worldedit.privs can be
if volfunc == nil then
volfunc = function(name, param) end
end
--worldedit.privs was run once to prevent safe_region large area warnings,
--then safe_region was run to prevent unnecessary large-scale permission checks
--then can_edit_volume is run before //set to honor areas
--then worldedit.privs is run again to attempt skipping checks (resusing the same code)
--then set is finally run.
return function(name, param)
--worldedit.privs said that 'name' can use worldedit at least somewhere
-- return value 1 (or 2) before this function was run.
--Try skipping volume permission checks.
local wp = worldedit.privs()
if wp == 2 then
volfunc(name, param)
return true
elseif wp == nil then
--safety feature in case worldedit.can_edit_volume is ever run alone, without being surrounded by worldedit.privs()
--Shouldn't ever get here.
--Any volume-changing function is surrounded by this, then safe_region, then worldedit.privs()
--volfunc(name, param) placeholder
return false
end
2014-04-16 22:35:46 +02:00
--[[I need to use a special per-command region (think /stack, or even worse, /move), the same one safe_region uses, but corner points instead of count... instead of a for loop interpolating between pos1 and pos2]]--
--cache the result of this function for later
local has_worldedit = minetest.check_player_privs(name, {worldedit=true})
--all or nothing here
for i in volume do
--[[
THIS SECTION IGNORES the distinction of area that is owned by someone else, but still editable
this is treated as area owned by the editor, or no-man's land depending on if it's shared with one person or everyone
2014-04-16 22:35:46 +02:00
If it was treated differently (it's not), then single edits would not be able to cross the border between someone else's editable land, and no-man's land, to prevent accidental writes. It may cross the border between multiple people's editable land (or should it?), such as to create a bridge between two skyscrapers that were previously built separately.
2014-04-16 22:35:46 +02:00
This needs testing for the other changes first.
--]]
--Is it owned?
if minetest.is_protected(i) then
--Is it someone else's?
if minetest.is_protected(i, name) then
--already checked the ability to make it mine (areas)
minetest.chat_send_player(name, "Someone else owns at least part of what you want to edit")
--volfunc(name, param) placeholder
return false
end
--it's mine
--continue
--no-man's land
--can I edit that?
elseif not has_worldedit then --use cached check
minetest.chat_send_player(name, "You can only edit area in which you own a plot (missing worldedit privilege)")
--volfunc(name, param) placeholder
2014-04-16 22:35:46 +02:00
return false
end
end
--the whole thing is
--a) owned by me, and/or
--b) owned by no one and I have the worldedit privilege.
--c) I have the areas privilege and it's possibly owned by someone else. (returned earlier)
volfunc(name, param)
return true
end
2014-04-16 22:35:46 +02:00
end