[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 1, PEP Purpose and Guidelines

...

...

...

...

"FP" == François Pinard writes:

>> It has been a while since I posted a copy of PEP 1 to the >> mailing lists and newsgroups. FP> Thanks for giving me this opportunity. There is a tiny detail FP> that bothers me: >> The format of the author entry should be address@dom.ain >> (Random J. User) if the email address is included, and just >> Random J. User if the address is not given. FP> This makes me jump fifteen years behind (or so, I do not FP> remember times), at the time of the great push so the Internet FP> prefers: FP> Random J. User FP> It is more reasonable to always give the real name, optionally FP> followed by an email, that to consider that the real name is a FP> mere comment for the email address. This is a good point. Originally we thought it was more important to be able to contact the author, but there are quite a few reasons to revise this intention. As pointed out, email addresses change. Also, experience has shown that most of the discussions about PEPs are conducted on the public forums (mailing lists / newsgroups), so that's a fine way to contact the people working on the PEP. And of course, we allow the PEP authors to obfuscate or omit their email addresses altogether. FP> Could the PEP be reformulated, at least, for leaving the FP> choice opened? I'd rather have one preferred way of writing the header, so I'm going to change PEP 1 to mandate "Random J. User " with the email address optional. However, I'm going to let the old style remain for historical purposes since I don't think it's worth changing the existing PEPs. Thanks, -Barry