On 2/9/06, Barry Warsaw <barry at python.org> wrote: > On Thu, 2006-02-09 at 11:30 -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote: > > > In the past, the protocol for aqcuiring a PEP number has been to ask > > the PEP coordinators (Barry Warsaw and David Goodger) to assign one. I > > believe that we could simplify this protocol to avoid necessary > > involvement of the PEP coordinators; all that is needed is someone > > with checkin privileges. I propose the following protocol: > > [omitted] > > In general, this is probably fine. Occasionally we reserve a PEP number > for something special, or for a pre-request, but I think both are pretty > rare. And because of svn and the commit messages we can at least catch > those fairly quickly and fix them. Maybe we can add known reserved > numbers to PEP 0 so they aren't taken accidentally. > > What I'm actually more concerned about is that we (really David) often > review PEPs and reject first submissions on several grounds. I must say > that David's done such a good job at keeping the quality of PEPs high > that I'm leery of interfering with that. OTOH, perhaps those with > commit privileges should be expected to produce high quality PEPs on the > first draft. > > Maybe we can amend your rules to those people who both have commit > privileges and have successfully submitted a PEP before. PEP virgins > should go through the normal process. > Sounds reasonable to me. Then again I don't think I would ever attempt to get a PEP accepted without at least a single pass over by python-dev or c.l.py . But making it simpler definitely would be nice when you can already check in yourself. -Brett
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