beta backport PR 52232

[pnkfelix]

This is a dummy issue linking to PR #52232 so that we can have an open issue (which is apparently a requirement if one wants to leverage the rfcbot).

[pnkfelix]

@rfcbot fcp merge

I propose that we approve backporting #52232 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.")

[rfcbot]

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

• @Zoxc
• @cramertj
• @eddyb
• @estebank
• @michaelwoerister
• @nagisa
• @nikomatsakis
• @oli-obk
• @petrochenkov
• @pnkfelix
• @varkor

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.

[kennytm]

What about stable?

[pnkfelix]

ugh I guess I will open a separate issue for stable? hashtag what a pain

[pnkfelix]

(who was the genius who suggested using async to resolve this. ... ;)

[rfcbot]

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