We've done this a few times now, so maybe a good time to review. I have thoughts on a few specific topics.
P-high - what's it mean?
We are down to 3 P-high bugs!
This is awesome. We are ruthless at triage. It's probably time to think again about what P-high means based on what we've learned, as well as how to make sure the right bugs are P-high.
My best guess is that P-high means 'critical to fix right now'. As a corollary, that also means 'somebody is assigned'. If we're not willing to assign somebody thin it must not be critical.
P-high - how do we get more of them?
Is it really only 3 bugs that we think are important to fix right now? We've structured this to be great at demoting P-high bugs, but not uncovering new ones - most P-medium seem to stay P-medium. Should we incorporate triage of new bugs into this process? If so, it's not clear when we'll have the time, since there's a steady stream of new bugs.
Regressions
Similar to the last, we're not doing anything in particular to uncover regressions and promote them to P-high. Just hoping that individuals are watching the incoming issues and tagging them right.
Frequency
We still haven't gotten through the backlog of P-medium bugs, and per the previous topics there's still more useful triage we probably should be doing. Anybody interested in bumping the frequency from every 3 weeks to every 2 weeks?
cc @compiler_subteam, @lang_subteam, @sanxiyn @steveklabnik @alexcrichton @jntrnr reviewing the triage process
