Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Bug]: Problems resolving appeals escalated to Cinder's Legal queue for rejected versions in rev tools #15296

Open
1 task done
ioanarusiczki opened this issue Jan 21, 2025 · 1 comment

Comments

@ioanarusiczki
Copy link

ioanarusiczki commented Jan 21, 2025

What happened?

Didn't notice when testing a while ago #15279 (comment)

This is reproducible with signed listed/unlisted versions rejected (dsa or non-dsa) after appeals have been forwarded to Legal Escalations in Cinder. ❌

It is working as expected when instead of rejecting the versions the add-ons are disabled. ✅

STR:

  1. reviewers reject a version in rev tools
  2. email is sent to developer
  3. developer sends an appeal
  4. the appeal flags the version for HR -> available in Manual Review Queue
  5. appeal is escalated to Cinder Legal Escalations where developer's appeal can be denied or approved

What did you expect to happen?

  • when decision is to deny appeal, which can be done with sub policies from Acceptable Use or Copyright and Trademark an email is sent but it's not correct (it has a new appeal url attached) ❌

Image

  • when decision is to approve the appeal with Ignore - Not enough information , a correct email is sent but the content is not reinstated ❌

Is there an existing issue for this?

  • I have searched the existing issues

┆Issue is synchronized with this Jira Task

@abyrne-moz
Copy link

  1. It looks like this issue was not treated as an appeal. The email should not include the appeal link and text when closing an appeal.
  2. The Ignore - Not Enough Information policy should not be able to be applied to appeals.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants