On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 8:54 AM, Ivan Levkivskyi <levkivskyi@gmail.com> wrote:

On 10 November 2017 at 17:43, Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org> wrote:
There seem to be some action items from this thread that I haven't seen reflected in the PEP source code yet.
[...snip...]
Then the next step I propose is a PR with a full implementation. After that I'll likely approve the PEP (or we'll have minor feedback based on trying the implementation).

Yes, sorry, I wanted to make updates to the PEP and reference implementation,
but last two weeks were very busy.
Hopefully, I will work on it this weekend.

Thanks, I am happy now with the PEP, except for one detail: maybe `__mro_entry__` should always return a tuple and then maybe renamed to `__mro_entries__`. (See debate at https://github.com/python/peps/pull/460#issuecomment-343969528 .)

Other than that I think we just need to satisfy a process nit: let's post the final PEP (after that issue is resolved) to python-dev.

--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)