squiid/rust
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Activity

Introduce S-actionable and S-unactionable labels

Browse source 
I've noticed that a significant fraction of issues are inert.
They are valid, acknowledged and useful, but effectively can't be
fixed for variety of reasons (no reproduction, dependencies on some
other issues, no review capacity, etc).

Marking issues that can be fixed by just applying some elbow grease
seems useful!
This commit is contained in:
Aleksey Kladov 2020-10-14 15:20:31 +02:00
parent 3e450cf89f
commit 190011168d
1 changed files with 6 additions and 1 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

7
docs/dev/README.md
View file

@ -35,7 +35,12 @@ https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/185405-t-compiler.2Fwg-rls-2.2E0
* [E-easy](https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3AE-easy),
[E-medium](https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3AE-medium),
[E-hard](https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3AE-hard),
labels are *estimates* for how hard would be to write a fix.
[E-unknown](https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3AE-unknown),
labels are *estimates* for how hard would be to write a fix. Each triaged issue should have one of these labels.
* [S-actionable](https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3AS-actionable) and
[S-unactionable](https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3AS-unactionable)
specify if there are concrete steps to resolve or advance an issue. Roughly, actionable issues need only work to be fixed,
while unactionable ones are effectively wont-fix. Each triaged issue should have one of these labels.
* [fun](https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3Afun)
is for cool, but probably hard stuff.