Hi,

I get that this seems to be a controversial topic, but IMHO the fact that it is (and the current vote count shows that) tells me that it's probably not time to mark it final just yet. For reference, both the flit and the setuptools maintainers object against it. That being said I'm done discussing this any further. I get that we have differing opinions and I'm willing to accept that. I've called the vote because I've agreed with Paul that we will not reach an agreement, and instead of bikeshedding our arguments any further let democracy do its job (and the arguments people tried to raise after did not change my mind either). Happy new year to everyone,

Bernat

On Tue, Dec 28, 2021 at 9:53 AM Paul Moore <p.f.moore@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 28 Dec 2021 at 08:40, Pradyun Gedam <pradyunsg@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> At best, I feel putting this up for a “vote” either way is ridiculously premature — given that folks are elaborating their reasoning in long form in addition to their “vote”, and the fact that there seems to be a lack of discussion on this overall (and that this is being done during a holiday period).

To be honest, I agree. My comment on Discourse was "A PyPA vote is
probably the nearest equivalent for packaging, so if we can’t reach
consensus, I suggest someone puts it to a PyPA vote". We certainly
made no attempt to get consensus on Discourse before Bernát started
the vote here. If I felt that the decision mattered that much, I'd
have objected myself - but to be honest, I think moving to Final is
little more than a formality at this stage, it's not as if we're going
to approve incompatible changes which would break all of the projects
Stéphane mentioned on Discourse.

Frankly, I'm now convinced that Provisional status for packaging PEPs
(at least the interoperability ones) is unworkable, for basically the
reasons stated by Ian, and personally, I will definitely *not* be
approving any new PEPs as Provisional. If they don't make the case to
be Final from the start, they can be rejected or sent back for
revision before acceptance. (Obviously, other PEP delegates can take
whatever view they prefer).

> I’m not happy that I’m being that guy who shouts “process” to stop things but we explicitly decided to have a discussion + delegate-decides for technical things and discussion + vote model for governance things. Let’s follow that.

Thanks for being that person, nevertheless. I'm sick of being the one
who refers to process all the time myself, so it's good to have
someone else help out :-)

Paul.