On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 12:48:06AM +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote: > Currently we have 6 DM processes that have been stalled for many months > (the oldest started last May, i.e. 9 months ago) because of issues with > the applicant GPG key. > Issues range from "no signatures at all" through "no dd signatures" to > "unacceptable uid, rejected by keyring-maint". <dons keyring-maint hat>Let's be clear, the only rejected UID I recall recently was someone applying for DM status who had added an @debian.org email address to their key which they had no entitlement to.</doffs keyring-maint hat> > I believe the processes should not proceed (in particular, not accept > advocacies) until the key is not valid, or manually accepted by FD. > Those 6 processes I've looked at don't show any sign of a solution in > sight, and will probably be closed by FD one of these days, causing > unhappiness for all the involved parties¹. At the moment there is no requirement on Front Desk to get involved in a process before it's been confirmed that an applicant has an advocate and is ready to progress in their application. Your proposal would instead require that Front Desk get involved at the start of any process and prevent any action until they had done so. That pushes the up front work from a large pool of potentials (the advocates) to a small, overworked team (Front Desk). From where I'm sitting it's not clear that is an improvement. Those processes with invalid keys will still be stalled, they will still sit visible in the Front Desk web interface until closed out or the key issues are fixed and really the only slight positive seems to be that advocates won't have to send advocacies for people who might not make it through the process. J. -- Revd Jonathan McDowell, ULC | Funny how life imitates LSD.
Description: PGP signature