Looking at the main repo on github makes you wonder what's with, probably, the record number of open issues. Is there a need to focus on solving and closing as many of those as possible or are there other priorities right now?
As in the number of open issues and PR:s on GitHub - rust-lang/rust: Empowering everyone to build reliable and efficient software. ? It may seem a lot, but for a project of that magnitude, an entire programming language, I don't think it is that much. E.g. golang has roughly the same numbers.
The way you phrase the question makes it sound like you'd like to close the issues just to get the number go down.
I've looked at a random sample of issues, and they don't seem to be junk/spam/irrelevant. Rust is just that big, with so many things to do. Each issue is related to some bug or feature request. Just focusing on finding issues to close doesn't fix bugs or implement features, and may only annoy people who reported them that filing the issue was for nothing.
@kornel wouldn't want to close them just for the numbers to go down. But I saw at least a few which are somewhat irrelevant or not related to the rust project... Which led me wondering if there is a team of moderators of those issues and how is the process managed overall.
P.S. I edited the title and content of the topic a bit. Hope it looks better now.
@kaj Indeed. However, keeping the queue clean makes it easier to focus on what needs to be done or at least it removes clutter.
I am not aware of any document or resource outlining community’s priorities or vision at this point which makes me wonder...
There is a triage team, and I'm sure they could use more help if you're interested:
The scary thing is that the current open number is with the triage team doing a great job of closing or dup'ing a huge number of them.
I think the core problem is that there's are a ton of "it would be nice if ______" issues. And yeah, it probably would be nice. That set of things grows unboundedly, however, and it's not obvious that it's worth keeping them in an issue tracker.
But the sharp social cost of the fight that often happens from saying "no, your issue isn't worth leaving open" is much, much more painful than the slow, peanut-buttered cost of the tracker having more and more stuff in it. So in a behavioural-economics kind of way, it makes sense that it's the way it is.
On the other hand, if you look at the "this used to work but now it doesn't" issues, those seem to generally get addressed pretty quickly. Sometimes by fixing it, sometimes by "we're allowed to break that and it was intentional", but regardless it tends to get worked through.
@scottmcm Thank you for your detailed reply. I guess I was looking for the info about the triage team but somehow I didn't manage to find it on my own. Will talk to the team members to see what are their plans and what needs to be done.