@WG-prioritization/alerts issue #77819 has been requested for prioritization.
I-nominated
?P-critical IMO - this is unsoundness in the compiler itself
let me see how long we've been at 0.4.3
Do we prioritize PRs too?
I mean, I don't see a big difference between a PR and an issue
if there's a PR for an existing issue there's no need to prioritize it
Okay. Yeah critical seems right here
Why should this be P-critical
? Does rustc use the bounded
channel for any types which have a relevant drop impl?
nm, the drop impl isn't actually relevant here. We deallocate the wrong number of elements so we cause UB in the memory allocator
I personally don't believe this alone warrants a point release by itself :thinking:
UB in the memory allocator seems like it should need a point release to me :/ but anyway wg-prioritization doesn't decide on backports, I just nominated it
we normally don't prioritise a pr though, unless it really needs to be pushed
We can nominate it though
I don’t think a priority makes sense on a PR
if it's beta nominated I don't think it also needs I-nominate
LeSeulArtichaut said:
I don’t think a priority makes sense on a PR
the reason I think it should be prioritized is there's no issue tracking the unsoundness
if you want to open an issue and prioritize that instead I'm fine with it
I think I’d rather open an issue and apply the priority there
Depends on the filters we use for P-critical in meetings too
Joshua Nelson said:
if it's beta nominated I don't think it also needs I-nominate
I think these should be kept separate, because the don't call for the same type of discussion. {stable,beta}-nominated
specifically asks if the PR should be backported.
I think, if we want to push a PR, I-nominated
is the way to go rather than P-*
labels, and we can also ping reviewers.
The PR was approved. Should I remove I-prioritize
?
Or we can just wait until it's merged
Issue #77819's prioritization request has been removed.
Removed I-prioritize
, I don’t think it’s useful anymore