Page MenuHomePhabricator

electionadmin group needs to be added to testwiki to restore securepolls testing functionality
Closed, ResolvedPublic

Description

securepolls can no longer be created on testwiki as adding a user from the electionadmin group is required but the group does not exist

Steps to Reproduce:

  1. Go to https://test.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:SecurePoll/create
  2. Attempt to create the poll

Actual Results:
Poll creation fails, it demands a value for Admins, but requires that Admins be "a member of the electionadmin group."

Expected Results:
Polls should allow the poll creator (those with (securepoll-create-poll) access) to specify admins.
Polls shouldn't be checking for a poll admin to be "in a group" - perhaps they should check if a poll admin "has a permission" - in which case said needed permission may need to be added


Apparently this breaking functionality was expected - and requires the group to be readded.

On testwiki can we

  1. initiate the group with: $wgGroupPermissions['electionadmin'] = [];
  2. Add group management of this group to testwiki bureaucrats

Event Timeline

Xaosflux renamed this task from securepolls can no longer be created on testwiki as adding a user from the electionadmin group is required but the group does not exist to unable to create securepolls on testwiki.Mar 13 2021, 1:20 AM
Xaosflux updated the task description. (Show Details)

This was deliberately implemented by T271327.

Testwiki does indeed seem to lack the requisite group setup. We should adjust its config. (Adjusting the code to check for a permission would also be reasonable.)

DLynch removed STran as the assignee of this task.Mar 15 2021, 5:46 PM
DLynch added a subscriber: STran.
Tchanders added a subscriber: Tchanders.

Thanks for filing this @Xaosflux

This was deliberately implemented by T271327.

Testwiki does indeed seem to lack the requisite group setup. We should adjust its config. (Adjusting the code to check for a permission would also be reasonable.)

The config change that's needed is documented here: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:SecurePoll

Xaosflux changed the subtype of this task from "Bug Report" to "Task".Mar 15 2021, 9:19 PM
Xaosflux renamed this task from unable to create securepolls on testwiki to electionadmin group needs to be readded to testwiki for securepolls testing.Mar 15 2021, 9:22 PM
Xaosflux renamed this task from electionadmin group needs to be readded to testwiki for securepolls testing to electionadmin group needs to be added to testwiki to restore securepolls testing functionality.
Xaosflux updated the task description. (Show Details)

Why should we test voting on testwiki? The election database is shared anyway, so it doesn't make much sense to create an election on non-votewiki wiki.

I'm boldly closing this as declined. If securepoll has ability to make a standalone testwiki only election cluster, it can be revisited.

@Urbanecm if this is not going to be available for production community testing, any reason to leave the extension running on this project then?

Why should we test voting on testwiki? The election database is shared anyway, so it doesn't make much sense to create an election on non-votewiki wiki.

Where else should community members test a SUL connected poll? It has been available on testwiki for testing for years, such testing is what led to reporting of the bugs that spawned the changes that broke the ability to test anymore by not adding the entitlements.

I want to test an STV poll and I can't. I already was able to do such tests on testwiki (here), but now I can't. I object to the closure of this task.

After consulting with @Xaosflux, I am going to boldly reopen this task to get to the bottom of why there is developer pushback. If need be, I can assign it to myself and do the configuration myself.

I need to do some tests with SecurePoll, especially now that the Anti-Harassment team is adding Meek STV to the SecurePoll T281032 and this voting system is going to be used in the next Board election in less than 2 weeks.

Fawiki has pushed for this change (STV support) since at least 2015 T117127, and will hopefully use this voting method for its next ArbCom elections (late October).

Anti-Harassment Tools team would also like to make this change so we can test STV on testwiki without jeopardizing votewiki or cluttering it with multiple "test" electoins. @Urbanecm does this sound fine to you?

This functionality was available for years, was there an actual problem that required restricting this?

Change 708794 had a related patch set uploaded (by Phuedx; author: Phuedx):

[operations/mediawiki-config@master] test: Add electcomm and electionadmin groups

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/708794

Change 708794 merged by jenkins-bot:

[operations/mediawiki-config@master] test: Add electcomm and electionadmin groups

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/708794

Niharika assigned this task to TrangaBellam.
Niharika reassigned this task from TrangaBellam to STran.
Niharika added a subscriber: TrangaBellam.
Niharika removed a subscriber: TrangaBellam.

This change has now been merged. electionadmin and electcomm groups now exist on testwiki.

This was reverted, because of T290808.

This was reverted, because of T290808.

As that task is hidden, is it open and this should be reopened and blocked?

Reopened pending some information.

This was reverted, because of T290808.

As that task is hidden, is it open and this should be reopened and blocked?

Sorry, I meant to reply yesterday, but I forgot to. As of now, the issue described in the restricted task does prevent deployment of the management group on any other wikis than votewiki. I expect the restricted task will likely get released reasonably soon. After that happens, it will be possible to discuss and decide about what next steps for a possible re-deployment of the management groups could be.

If you wish, I can create a public counterpart of the restricted task, so there would be a place to watch for more details about this incident.

I prefer this task being closed, as there might be different people working on a new deployment.

Re-closing based on notes from @Urbanecm ; yes please add me to to the other ticket and I'll help follow up and/or make a shadow public task.

Re-closing based on notes from @Urbanecm ; yes please add me to to the other ticket and I'll help follow up and/or make a shadow public task.

I'm sorry, there must've been some misunderstanding -- I wasn't offering to add you to the private task (I wanted to say that I think it will be made public reasonably soon).

Created T290856 for public tracking.