By now, if you have email notifications on GitHub, you’ve probably seen an email about moving issues to other repositories. Here’s the deal:
Historically, Rust collected everything in the issue tracker. But as we grow, this is less and less appropriate. Furthermore, as things become stable, more and more changes will be categorized as ‘substantial’ and will need to go through the RFC process. There’s also the question of ecosystem vs. the compiler vs. the language itself. So here’s the new categorization of issues and where they should go:
- The rust-lang/rust issue tracker is for clearly actionable issues relating to the compiler, standard library and its implementation.
- The rust-lang/rfcs issue tracker is for issues relating to the language itself, and its ecosystem.
Some sample bug reports and where they should be filed:
- “I just got an ICE” -> rust
- “We should change the behavior of a built-in trait” -> rfcs
- “Rust should have nonblocking I/O” -> rfcs
- “the borrow checker has some incorrect behavior” -> rust
- “the borrow checker should work differently” -> rfcs
- “this std API returns the wrong result” -> rust
- “std should have this new API” -> rfcs
A good rule of thumb here: if I wrote an alternate compiler for Rust, would it care about this bug? If so, it belongs on the rfc repo. If not, it belongs on the rust repo.
Right now, I’m tagging all moved issues with A-Wishlist, but we will probably grow more and better categories for the RFC repo over time.
While I’m working on this kind of categorization, I’m also just doing general triage, so you may also see things related to that.