2009/6/30 Guido van Rossum firstname.lastname@example.org:
On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 5:32 AM, Nick Coghlanncoghlan@gmail.com wrote:
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
If no one objects, I'd like to push PEP 376 in the "accepted" status and go ahead with its implementation, with continuous feedback at Distutils-SIG as we did to build it.
I think this isn't quite the process. In the past, every PEP required BDFL pronouncement, which you should now seek.
Agreed. While Guido is highly likely to just accept the distutils-sig consensus on something like this, that doesn't eliminate the need for him to actually *say* that he is approving the PEP on that basis.
So what *is* the distutils-sig consensus?
And is there consensus outside of it? (Remember the ipaddr debacle. It's easy for people to miss an important PEP.)
Looks like the discussion isn't quite over yet...
I did read about a third of the PEP but still feel pretty lost about how it all fits together; I won't have time to read more until next week, probably. I made some minor edits for typos and grammar (being PEP editor and all :-).
I noted an inconsistency: first you say that the RECORD file uses the excel dialect, but at the end of the same section you say it uses the default csv settings. Sounds like you need to delete one or the other.