A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2000-November/010299.html below:

[Python-Dev] Re: [Python-checkins] CVS: python/nondist/peps pep-0204.txt,1.4,1.5

[Python-Dev] Re: [Python-checkins] CVS: python/nondist/peps pep-0204.txt,1.4,1.5Guido van Rossum guido@python.org
Thu, 02 Nov 2000 01:28:26 -0500
> Shouldn't we allow other people to tweak PEP 0? It would certainly lighten
> Barry's administrative overload.
> 
> I mean, geez... this is what source control is about. Let a lot of people in
> there, but be able to back up in case somebody totally goofs it.

Agreed.

> This goes for adding new PEPs, too. I'm not as convinced here, since some
> level of "good enough for a PEP" filtering is probably desirable, but then
> again, it would seem that the people with commit access probably have that
> filter in their head anyways.

Here, common sense and good judgement should be applied.  If there
seems to be consensus that a PEP is needed, there's no need to wait
for Barry.  The update to PEP-0000 commits the assignment of the new
PEP number.  But the new PEP should follow all the rules for a new
PEP!

Having Barry in the loop makes sense for those who aren't sure they
can comply with all the rules, and for those outside the python-dev
community.

--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)



RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.4