@WG-prioritization/alerts issue #77585 has been requested for prioritization.
Is it only for FreeBSD/amd64?
I think we’d need to bisect this quickly but I’d prefer if we knew if this is a FreeBSD-only bug
By reading the comment thread, it looks like to be consistent with a previous patch? Could be perhaps closed unless other thoughts on the matter.
yeah IMO this should be closed wontfix
Issue #77585's prioritization request has been removed.
yup, was closed
@LeSeulArtichaut can we set up automation to remove
I-prioritize if the issue is closed?
We'd need to add a feature to triagebot
what if the issue is accidentally closed ? Like one of the members on the phone and mistakenly do that.
/me has never done that :innocent:
Well, I guess either it's caught or it's not :innocent:
I mean, they mistakenly close and they reopen it immediately.
Then they could notice rustbot has removed the label?
Or maybe one of us could notice
I think at this point we're down to very specific cases
if it is closed by bors, I think it is good to remove the label.
If it's closed as wontfix or duplicate?
We have no automatic way to know that, do we ?
The person (often a org member) marks duplicated could remove the label.
So we basically have a tradeoff between convenience and the rare risk of someone closing the issue by accident
most of the time issues closed by bors
I think we should move this conversation to #t-compiler/wg-prioritization and ask the rest of the WG.
think of it again. It is just I-nominated label, we should get a comment by triagebot in this stream about label removed.
So I agree with removing it automatically.
Automatic removal in this case seems like a good route. Even if an issue did get closed by accident I think it's likely that whomever closed it would notice the label getting removed and be able to re-add.
Would adding a delay to triagebot between issue close and label removal mitigate the chance of it happening accidentally?