Martin Panter added the comment: I am willing to drop most of the code and comment changes if that moves us closer to consensus. Paul: would you accept changing the heading “optional arguments” to “options” in 3.6? I thought we were close to consensus to use “options”, but maybe that is my own bias showing. Re-reading through this thread, here is a summary of the people that seem to prefer renaming the “optional arguments” heading: Steven: “flag arguments”, but concerned about affecting existing help messages David: options, switches Eric: replace adjective “optional” but leave “. . . arguments” Ben (OP): options Martin Panter: options, flags, switches, or non-positional arguments Oliver: switches Terry: keyword arguments Ryan: options, or other suggestions Martin d'Anjou and Raymond seem to prefer splitting out a third group, “required arguments”, although it is not clear how that would tie in with the “positional arguments” group. I think making it easier to modify the headings is worthwhile only if we deprecated the old heading in favour of using a new default name in the future. To me the problem is the default behaviour, not that argparse is inflexible. Another option might be to fix Issue 10529 (explain using gettext with argparse), and then use that to translate the "optional arguments" string. But I don’t know how to do this. Another thought is if we added a notice to Porting to Python 3.6 in What’s New, that might ease concerns about changing the heading. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue9694> _______________________________________