The SecurePoll extension is already installed on enwiki.

Change #1083870 had a related patch set uploaded (by Dreamrimmer; author: Dreamrimmer):

[operations/mediawiki-config@master] Enable electionadmin user group on enwiki

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/1083870

I suggest stalling this until T377531 is resolved.

At the moment, it sounds like enwiki wants to put all the SecurePoll perms in the electionadmin user group. Having all the perms in the same group that they were basically in before means that the unbundling in T377531 will have no effect on this ticket, right? May not need to stall this.

As for the social/consensus side of things, we can create the electionadmin group as a first step, then not give it to anyone until we hammer out the details of how it will be given out. The exact process for giving it out is still being discussed on enwiki, but there is a consensus to have SecurePoll on enwiki and to have electionadmins.

WP:SNOW: unanimous support to have the ability to hold local SecurePoll elections, including enabling the electionadmin right on enwiki. An RFC to determine how the new right should be distributed can be launched at any time; it may be advisable to advertise that RFC on WP:CENT. --Levivich

Would the line $wgGroupPermissions['electionadmin']['securepoll-administrate-poll'] = true; cause any problems if securepoll-administrate-poll isn't created yet?

In T378287#10271579, @Novem_Linguae wrote:

Would the line $wgGroupPermissions['electionadmin']['securepoll-administrate-poll'] = true; cause any problems if securepoll-administrate-poll isn't created yet?

This wouldn't cause any problems, but it would be redundant in the codebase, so leaving it for now is the best approach. For now, we can create the electionadmin user group with existing rights, and later, if there are any updates, we can add more rights as needed. I think creating this user group is harmless since no one can add or remove it at the moment (except stewards). When the community decides who can grant access to this user group and to whom, we can then add the configurations for wgAddGroups and wgRemoveGroups.

In T378287#10271575, @Novem_Linguae wrote:

At the moment, it sounds like enwiki wants to put all the SecurePoll perms in the electionadmin user group.

In https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(idea_lab)#Determining_who_should_be_an_electionadmin, there is just one user who appears to suggest putting all perms in one group.

There are more people who suggest bundling poll creation and editing into sysop, and view-voter-pii into CheckUser. If that is the eventual consensus, we don't need the electionadmin group at all.

Also, it's just an idea lab discussion, likely a prelude to a more organized VPR discussion or RfC which the closer of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Enabling_SecurePoll_elections_with_the_electionadmin_right suggested should happen before enwiki deployment:

An RFC to determine how the new right should be distributed can be launched at any time; it may be advisable to advertise that RFC on WP:CENT.

It would help if T377531 is resolved before such a discussion happens.

I'd be in favor of getting this deployed so the electionadmin group exists. This would get the technical part out of the way. Then, onwiki and at the community's convenience, we can workshop a policy/guideline for which users it can be granted to.

I think this will be ready for deployment once the two code review comments are resolved.

I would like to avoid decision paralysis here.

I will tweak the patch shortly.