How to handle typechecker specific bugs

In the past, we've worked around typechecker bugs and missing features in typeshed. But as the amount of typecheckers grows and type stubs are used for more that just type checking, I don't think we can work around any bug or missing feature of every typechecker in typeshed, especially if this means regressing our stubs. Not only is this more maintainer work and it gets hard to remember which typechecker has which bug, it also means that users of bug-free typecheckers and other software will still be affected by those bugs.

I think that we should still accommodate very impactful bugs and missing major features (per our "tracking" bugs) for the "big four" mypy, pytype, pyright, and pyre. We also need to work around some bugs due to our tests. But apart from that, we should work with typecheck authors (and there is some overlap here, of course) to come up with a solution.

Regarding stdlib stubs, I believe one option is that typecheckers ship with a customized version of typeshed for major problems. Apart from that, it's always possible for users to # type: ignore a problem with a specific typechecker.

Beginne damit, die Diskussion im Issue und die referenzierten Tracking-Bugs für mypy, pytype, pyright und pyre zu lesen. Dies ist eher eine Richtlinien-/Designfrage als eine lokalisierte Implementierungsaufgabe; sie ist erst abgeschlossen, wenn Maintainer und Typechecker-Autoren sich darauf geeinigt haben, wie mit größeren Bugs und fehlenden Features umgegangen werden soll.