On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Brett Cannon <email@example.com> wrote:I don't disagree that he shouldn't have cross-posted. I was just
> On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Chris Jerdonek <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>> On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Brett Cannon <email@example.com> wrote:
>> > And please do not CC the peps mailing list on discussions. It should
>> > only be
>> > used to mail in new PEPs or acceptable patches to PEPs.
>> PEP 1 should perhaps be clarified if the above is the case.
>> Currently, PEP 1 says all PEP-related e-mail should be sent there:
>> "The PEP editors assign PEP numbers and change their status. Please
>> send all PEP-related email to <firstname.lastname@example.org> (no cross-posting
>> please). Also see PEP Editor Responsibilities & Workflow below."
>> as well as:
>> "A PEP editor must subscribe to the <email@example.com> list. All
>> PEP-related correspondence should be sent (or CC'd) to
>> <firstname.lastname@example.org> (but please do not cross-post!)."
>> (Incidentally, the statement not to cross-post seems contradictory if
>> a PEP-related e-mail is also sent to python-dev, for example.)
> But it very clearly states to NOT cross-post which is exactly what Anatoly
> did and that is what I take issue with the most. I personally don't see any
> confusion with the wording. It clearly states that if you are a PEP author
> you should mail the peps editors and NOT cross-post. If you are an editor,
> make sure any emailing you do with an individual CCs the list but do NOT
pointing out that the language should be clarified. What's confusing
is that the current language implies that one shouldn't send any
PEP-related e-mails to any mailing list other than peps@. In
particular, how can one discuss PEPs on python-dev or python-ideas
without violating that language (e.g. this e-mail which is related to
PEP 1)? It is probably just a matter of clarifying what "PEP-related"