Thanks for the responses, everyone. Overall, it seems like there were no strong objections to the proposal.
I didn't hear much about Question 2, though: Should we propose features beyond present-day `Callable` in the same PEP or defer it to a future PEP?
In case that question got lost in the other details, feel free to respond here. If not, I'll take it there aren't strong opinions either way.
Sorry I didn't make it to the meeting. You know my opinion. :-)
Some of my other takeaways:
+ Address the implications of the syntax changes for Python.
In particular, when the syntax is used in a non-annotation position, it must evaluate to some object that represents the information present in the syntax (like Callable does ATM).
+ Address edge cases like trailing commas, `Concatenate` for `ParamSpec`, and runtime value of the expression.
+ Explicitly discuss the function-name-as-a-type proposal.
We will be drafting the PEP over the coming month.
Awesome. You have my blessing.