Experiments with gpg indicate that my first plan to have the scripts that run from web form submissions do the signing for rejections or PGPMoose approvals is not going to work. It seems that the gpg security features get in the way of doing anything in a suid script where real and effective users differ.

The simple solution is to migrate the STUMP mail handling into Webstump so that Webstump mails itself messages that trigger scripts that run entirely as the Webstump user to carry out the signing and either posting of articles or mailing of rejections. Messages that Webstump sends to itself do not need to contain any of the data (unlike messages to STUMP), they just need to say which message is to be processed.

Having a trigger message that just says 'process all articles with decisions' would require some concurrency control which is probably a step too far.

WebSTUMP bills itself as a front end to "STUMP and Gatekeeper", Gatekeeper being a successor to STUMP that its original developer, Igor Chudov, planned but apparently never ended up releasing.  So I think this means that WebSTUMP is not currently useful without STUMP. Conversely, I don't believe that STUMP is commonly used without WebSTUMP, but even if it is, I think there are no disadvantages to distributing WebSTUMP with STUMP.  So perhaps we should merge WebSTUMP into STUMP.