Edit: as someone involved with other, less mature (and less ambitious) open source projects, if you know of pain points in the governance of rust, i'd be interested in learning about them.
I was under the impression that a few primary contributors (mostly/all mozilla employees?) are gatekeepers to merging anything.
Having an "RFC" issue tracker isn't the same as having a governance structure.
Edit: I suppose you could call the above a 'governance structure', but I'm having a hard time seeing anything impressive/different about it from other open source projects
PRs can be reviewed by anyone from a large pool of reviewers. PRs that introduce new features etc. have to come after an RFC is approved, however.
The core team includes Huon Wilson, Yehuda Katz, and Steve Klabnik, none of whom work for Mozilla (though the latter two have done some contracting work). We hope to continue expanding to include other stakeholders.
EDIT: Steve tells me he's currently working as a "seasonal employee" at Mozilla for doing Rust docs, but it's a short term thing.
Maybe a third to a half are Mozilla employees (although it's infamously hard to tell who actually works at Mozilla and is just weirdly into maintaining Rust).
This page talks about the process and their code of conduct: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/wiki/Note-development-poli...