Re: Unadvocated applicants
On Sun, Sep 09, 2001 at 11:28:01PM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> I've just looked at the "All Applicants" page and noticed a strange
> phenomenon: in addition to the myriad applicants who have been on hold
> for a long period, there are also a few who signed up after we
> introduced advocation, but have no advocate and are still in the
> queue. The first one is: Alander Santos <alander@ieg.com.br>, which
> has the information:
>
> Date of application: 2001-04-12
> Advocate login: mnencia
> Advocate Date: 2001-06-28
> Advocate Check OK
> Adovate (spelling!) Check Date:
>
> What does this all mean, and where is the problem in this case?
It's a flaw in the state machine :/ but one that will be easy to fix :)
The time line is
12 Apr Alander signed up to the NM process
28 Jun mnencia agreed to be Alander's advocate, or Alander "volunteered
him". Email sent to mnencia
Nothing else happened. mnencia didn't reply back to the email.
My proposal is that we change the 3 week warning/ 6 weeks deletion to
keep working until the advocate check is complete and not just the assignment
of an advocate. That may mean some slight re-wording of some documents
too.
If there is a general consensus, I'll make the changes (or tbm will beat
me to it :)
- Craig
--
Craig Small VK2XLZ GnuPG:1C1B D893 1418 2AF4 45EE 95CB C76C E5AC 12CA DFA5
Eye-Net Consulting http://www.eye-net.com.au/ <csmall@eye-net.com.au>
MIEEE <csmall@ieee.org> Debian developer <csmall@debian.org>
Reply to: