Question

In the Talmud in Tractate Sabbath, its commandment is from sunset until the foot traffic disappears from the marketplace. “What, is it not…” etc.—that if one did not light, he may still light; alternatively, this refers to its required duration.
The straightforward understanding of the passage is that according to the first answer there is a time frame for lighting, and within it even lighting at any point is effective; according to the second answer there is a required duration for the lighting (half an hour), and the timing is less important.
Maimonides apparently rules in accordance with both answers: “Once this time has passed, he does not light… and one must put enough oil in the lamp so that it remains burning until the foot traffic disappears from the marketplace.”
In the Hagahot Maimoni there he wrote that Maimonides ruled like both answers leniently, since in matters of rabbinic law one follows the lenient view.
But in Maimonides it seems to be the opposite—that he ruled like both answers stringently: if the time has passed, he does not light, and there must be the required measure of oil. If he had ruled leniently, he should have ruled that one may light whenever he wants for whatever duration.