New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

beta backport PR 51956 #52313

pnkfelix opened this Issue Jul 12, 2018 · 4 comments


None yet
4 participants

pnkfelix commented Jul 12, 2018

This is a dummy issue linking to PR #51956 so that we can have an open issue (which is apparently a requirement if one wants to leverage the rfcbot).

@pnkfelix pnkfelix added the T-compiler label Jul 12, 2018


This comment has been minimized.


pnkfelix commented Jul 12, 2018

@rfcbot fcp merge

I propose that we approve backporting this to beta.

Since time is somewhat limited, and back ports are usually less controversial than the usual things that go through the fcp process, I'm going to add the additional note if there are no unresolved formal concerns in a week's time, I will just check off any unmarked check boxes. (This effectively inverts the rfcbot into "approved by default.")

@oli-obk You had proposed discussing this at a compiler meeting. I assume that such a discussion actually occurred during my absence. If your objection for some reason did not apply to nightly but does apply to beta, I encourage you to issue a formal concern here and hopefully that will prompt further conversation that will let us resolve this.


This comment has been minimized.

rfcbot commented Jul 12, 2018

Team member @pnkfelix has proposed to merge this. The next step is review by the rest of the tagged teams:

No concerns currently listed.

Once a majority of reviewers approve (and none object), this will enter its final comment period. If you spot a major issue that hasn't been raised at any point in this process, please speak up!

See this document for info about what commands tagged team members can give me.


This comment has been minimized.


oli-obk commented Jul 12, 2018

We did indeed discuss this and I have no objections to backporting this. Quite the opposite. Not backporting would mean some people can't document their code anymore once this hits stable


This comment has been minimized.

rfcbot commented Jul 14, 2018

🔔 This is now entering its final comment period, as per the review above. 🔔

bors added a commit that referenced this issue Jul 14, 2018

Auto merge of #52366 - pietroalbini:beta-backports, r=pietroalbini
[beta] Rollup backports

Merged and approved:

* #51956: Fix rustdoc run failures by shutting down definitely some lints
* #52232: use the adjusted type for cat_pattern in tuple patterns

Closes #52311
Closes #52313

r? @ghost
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment