On 03.07.2020 15:01, Henk-Jaap Wagenaar wrote:
On Fri, 3 Jul 2020 at 08:50, Ivan Pozdeev via Python-Dev <python-dev@python.org> wrote:

Per https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/KQSHT5RZPPUBBIALMANFTXCMIBGSIR5Z/, we're talking about an infinitely
less impactful peps repo (per https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/64LIUO4C3EWT45YCTRZLDA7B7IE33IXA/, only 6
people in the entire world would be affected).

It will not affect only 6 people.

That is just the number of people who have forks that we know about and even those who do not have forks but maintain a copy (for whatever reason) of the main branch will be affected: they will have to reset their branch or do some other malarkey to get this new "improved" history. This will be a much bigger group of people and also potentially software solutions that are mirroring the repo for one reason or another.

That's one of the prices you pay (or I would say benefit) for having a decentralized version control system: it makes it hard to rewrite (supposedly "improve") history.

So what? They'll have to synchronise their history to ours to be able to make a PR. And if they don't, it doesn't matter for us what they do with the data anyway since they are responsible for maintaining it and keeping it relevant if they need to, not us.

Plus, since it's the PEPs repo, it's tightly bould to the Python project -- the usefulness of a fork disconnected from it is pretty low.