I hope this doesn’t come across as being ungrateful to the team. GitHub Classroom is a very useful tool and has been very beneficial for us. However, I have been carefully following this forum for about 18 months. And there is a recurring theme. Someone brings up the issue of invitation acceptance taking “forever” (figuratively). At various stages, someone from the team may have replied to indicate that a fix was in the works or had been applied. Some time after the fix has been applied, someone else reports a similar long delay. I have kept records of the various postings over that time, but given that I have experienced the problem myself, hopefully we can just take it as read that it exists.
This creates a particular problem in the context of supervised exams, because of the time sensitivity. Particularly so if there is a local possibility that the supervisor in the room may not be technically skilled and may not be able to intervene. In any case, students taking exams are already anxious, without the software contributing to that by appearing to have hung.
Where I would hope to advance this is by trying to characterise the problem more accurately. It’s not about slowness. A typical pattern would be that everyone in a group has their invitation acceptance processed promptly, say in 5-10 seconds. For one person in the group, the processing could take 45 minutes. That’s if you let it run, which I have (on occasion) to try to see what would happen. Notably, it did actually complete and work fine after the 45 minutes, with no intervention. So there’s no distribution of times. Just a freak outlier. If I was to hazard a guess, it looks like that one particular acceptance processing finds itself in some kind of job queue that somehow gets starved. And that something else eventually identifies starved queues and gets them going again. That’s complete conjecture on my part but it’s one way of explaining the behaviour I’ve seen where there’s a big gulf between 10 seconds and 45 minutes. Perhaps I’m totally wrong.
So my question to some member of the team would be, does this ring a bell? Is there still a risk that this might occur? (The last time I experienced it was last summer.) I think it’s probably better to be fully transparent about any such risks, given how critically important it is that supervised exams run without a hitch.