Phase out sandbox projects

Since Sandboxes are not recommended, what is the recommended way of experimenting with Drupal's Gitlab integration, to get familiar with using it? For new users, having to experiment and possibly fail on live issues is less than ideal ...

It would be nice to clarify this after this sentence, on the Creating a new project > Sandbox projects → documentation page:

The switch to using GitLab, and the fact that anyone can now create a "full" project without requiring the extra step of obtaining the git vetted user role makes the use of sandboxes obsolete.

Maybe add something like this? (Assuming that this is correct, if not let's find a proper wording for a recommendation)

If you need to experiment with Drupal's Gitlab integration, for example doing Gitlab Merge Requests, you can create a new test project via https://git.drupalcode.org/users/*username*/projects (replace *username* with your user name). You can delete it, when you are finished with your experiments.

It would be great to include a clarification on this in the Issue Summary here, and add it to the Sandbox documentation page, possibly creating a new page. Or maybe such a page already exists?

I propose we reconsider deprecating sandbox projects in light of the use of AI to abuse the system.

• Non-vetted contributors should only be allowed to create sandbox projects.
• A sandbox project should only be promoted to a full project by a vetted contributor.
• A contributor who creates a release without reviewing it should be given a warning.
• A contributor who creates a release without reviewing it after being warned should lose vetted status for a year.

See 📌 Bulk LLM-generated module publishing by bigbabert Active for an example of a contributor using AI to abuse the system multiple times.

Re: #20 I believe that would need a large D.A. policy discussion first, separate from this issue.

Though I will warn I would suggest the D.A. refuse to accept such a policy. The Drupal Community lost uncountable hours of possible contributions in the old system. The long term problem of "unable to find maintainers' can likely track some of situation back to those early policies.

I remember the vetting process. I would not want to bring the previous vetting process back. I think an open vetting process would prevent a backlog from forming. The important thing is for vetted status to be revokable.