On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 04:49:45AM +0000, Holger Levsen wrote: > On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 10:28:09PM +0100, Jonathan McDowell wrote: > > It required a simple email from the advocate and a whole bunch of > > work on the back end to track such things amongst the Front Desk > > team. I appreciate you hate the web interface, but do not > > underestimate the improvements it has brought to the New Member > > process. > > I'm just puzzled that it seems to be too hard or unwanted to bring > back mail integration. Surely those advocates are part of the process > too? Automated email parsing is hard. There's no reliable format for an advocacy rather than something else, and that's before you realise you need to filter out spam. And then you have to deal with false detections. Probably involving someone actually looking at the output. And then there's the issue of having to maintain the extra code. Oh, and you have to figure out if the mail is actually from someone who can advocate, rather than just someone random turning up to comment. There never was any mail integration. There was anibal, reading the list and doing a great job of keeping on top of it but processing it all by hand. > > I clicked the "Debian account certificates" link > > I don't want a cert. Can't I just provide a username+password? > > > I logged in with noodles / my SSO password (configurable via > > db.debian.org) > > again: I have an SSO password, why do I need to mess with certificates? ... > going to nm.d.o now shows me i'm logged in. just > https://nm.debian.org/public/processes doesnt show Tom Marble and i'm > tiredly giving up, sorry Tom. It says "The process workflow is being reimplemented and this page lists only the processes using the old workflow." and directly below is a link "List of processes using the new workflow." and I click on that and I see a whole bunch of processes currently open needing something done, of which Tom's is one. Or Tom's mail to the list has a direct link to his process in the footer (as does every single statement of intent): https://nm.debian.org/process/284 > Guess I will keep advocating people via mail and ignore this web > stuff, sorry to the people who spent time on it. Seems to work for > some people well, but I'm not amongst them. Sorry, but I find your "I'm not prepared to do anything different to what I used to, or make an effort to use the new process because it's not what I want" combined with your seemingly willful inability to figure things out for yourself very wearing. I'm more than happy to help people who have legitimate problems getting themselves setup with SSO (and I'm not disagreeing that browsers make it a pain to do the initial steps), but I simply don't have the energy to continue this discussion with you. It's obvious I'm not going to change your mind about the NM website. J. -- Avoid temporary variables and strange women.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature