> I was going over the PEP index this morning, and I noticed a large number > of PEPs listed under the "open" list that would seem to me to be > "accepted", if not "done" in some cases, according to the criteria > described by the headings. (Specifically, PEPs 218, 237, 273, 282, 283, > 301, 302, 305, and 307.) Some of those (e.g. 237) have multiple stages and ought to remain open until the last stage is implemented. 283 ought to remain open until Python 2.3 final is released. Some others need to be brought in line with what ended up being implemented. Authors with commit privileges can update their own PEPs; others can send patches or new versions to the PEP editors. > Others under "open" I would guess are in fact "rejected", notably > 294 (the patch was closed rejected) Correct -- this *issue* is still open, but the solution from the PEP is rejected. > and 313 (presumably tongue-in-cheek). I think it's appropriate for April Fool's PEPs to be in limbo forever. --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