@WG-prioritization/alerts issue #73747 has been requested for prioritization.

Procedure

• Priority?
• Regression?
• Notify people/groups?
• Needs I-nominated?

That looks bad

I’d say at least P-high but I’m tempted to go for P-critical

Pinged cleanup for mvce and bisection

i'm bored so i'm gonna to try to reproduce this issue

trying to decide priority for this one

from what I see I agree with @LeSeulArtichaut

let's go with P-critical?

I'd summarize this as ... code for windows that compiles on stable doesn't compile anymore on nightly

and I think that qualifies as P-critical

We currently have 3 P-critical issues so I think labeling this as critical is reasonable

:+1:

anyway I don't think we should base our decision on the amount of P-critical we already have

although I understand your concern about having a big P-critical list

I'd say that we should be monitoring P-critical issues and we want them under control

mainly if we're making progress to fix them

Issue #73747's prioritization request has been removed.

Santiago Pastorino said:

anyway I don't think we should base our decision on the amount of P-critical we already have

I agree we shouldn't base our decision on the amout of P-criticals but I think this can be a factor, when we're not sure if an issue would need P-high or P-critical.

agreed :)

If there aren't many P-critical issues then I think we can label P-critical more easily to have more issues benefit from that surplus of attention.

@WG-prioritization/alerts issue #73747 has been requested for prioritization.

Procedure

• Priority?
• Regression?
• Notify people/groups?
• Needs I-nominated?

Re-requesting prioritization to discuss the priority of this given all of the new information.

I think we can keep this at P-critical until its fixed?

I suspect its going to leak into beta branch, since I think that is almost certainly going to be cut before PR #74340 lands

Let me double check with @simulacrum about that

pnkfelix said:

I suspect its going to leak into beta branch, since I think that is almost certainly going to be cut before PR #74340 lands

(This is based on my reading of https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/241545-t-release/topic/1.2E45.2E0.20release/near/203827748 )

It now has a fix: #74340

Oh sorry that’s what you said

Yeah if it might leak in beta I also think we should keep an eye on it

yeah. lets 1. keep it P-critical, and 2. make sure it doesn't accidentally both leak into beta while also getting closed

(i.e. there's a human-process-level race condition here that we need to be aware of)

Issue #73747's prioritization request has been removed.