On other blockchains, if it got an issue due to a failed upgrade, the dev team and node operators will work together to revert / resolve the issues ASAP. Usually the chain will resume operation within a day or two. This process is usually very centralized.
As a Polkadot parachain, we have a way to resolve this kind of issue in a fully decentralized way. However, as stated, 28 days is simply unacceptable for every use cases. Decentralization is one of the key factor that all of us here are working towards but it cannot come with the cost of, well, not working. A fully decentralized not working product is not going to compete with a centralized but working product. We all know that.
Can we improve it? Yes, we already had some prior discussions and planned RFC on improving the situation. Eventually we will have a decentralized, and also efficient and secure solution. But that will take time, I will say at least 6 months, most likely 12 months or more, to build, test, and deploy. This doesn’t help with the problems that we are facing NOW.
Can we do something NOW? Maybe? OpenGov does have the ability to fast track proposals. In order to avoid abuse, the proposals must be whitelisted by Fellowship. Again, in order to prevent abuse, we shouldn’t whitelist proposals unless it is necessary.
Me as a Dan 4 Fellowship member, for the reasons stated above, I believe it is right for the Fellowship to help in this case. A working blockchain is better than a not working one.