This sounds fine to me. For type hint s we did a similar thing with PEPs 482, 483 and 484. You probably want to make everyone involved a co-author.

On Tue, May 22, 2018, 14:29 Jeroen Demeyer <J.Demeyer@ugent.be> wrote:
Hello,

Both PEP 573 and PEP 575 deal with built-in functions. Additionally,
some people (Stefan Behnel, Robert Bradshaw, Jim Pivarski and me) are
currently brainstorming about a yet-to-be-written PEP to allow calling
the underlying C function of a built-in function using native types (for
example, a C long instead of a Python int). Think of it as analogous to
the buffer protocol: the buffer protocol exposes C *data* while this
would expose C *callables*.

Since all these PEPs would overlap somewhat, I'm starting to wonder
about the best way to organize this. Ideally, I would like some kind of
"meta-PEP" where we discuss the future of built-in functions in general
terms without too much details. This would be followed by several PEPs
each going in detail about one specific aspect.

Is there a precedent for this? What do the seasoned Python developers think?


Jeroen.
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list
Python-ideas@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/