@WG-prioritization/alerts issue #80059 has been requested for prioritization.
I-nominated
?Probably P-low as it's sound as-is, and has been this way for over 3 years.
I think either P-low
or P-medium
are fine here
P-medium
seems better to me, since P-low
is often "won't fix".
P-medium
seems good
Going with P-medium
then
Issue #80059's prioritization request has been removed.
I'm going to link here a comment from nikomatsakis on issue #79735 at least partly relevant to this one, too
@Léo Lanteri Thauvin 3 days ago you tried to remove the I-nominated
label but still has that label - should that label be removed?
I was wondering if it was nominated for T-lang
or T-compiler
I don't have the answer, but I think we should skip it in the agenda
(i.e. not include it)
Ultimately this needs a T-lang
decision (see rust-lang/unsafe-code-guidelines#261)
ok, will remove it. I was wondering how that label was still there after a deliberate action to remove it :thinking:
label from issue
do the t-lang pick that label somehow? (sorry always asking the same questions...)
I think it should stay there for T-lang
I'm pretty sure they do
ok, then I'd apply the I-nominated
back (fix my mistake) but then ... maybe remove T-compiler
so it doesnt appear in our agenda?
Seems fine to me, with a comment explaining that I guess
I can do it if you want
ok, left a brief note (hope it's fine). Just a small detail so when tomorrow we refresh the agenda this issue doesnt show up