Michael Selik writes:
On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 2:13 AM Stephen J. Turnbull <turnbull.stephen.fw@u.tsukuba.ac.jp> wrote:
That's because completion of discussion has never been a requirement for writing a PEP.
Not for drafting, but for submitting. For my own PEP submission, I received the specific feedback that it needed a "proper title" before being assigned a PEP number.
What does that have to do with "completion of discussion"? I don't know what the editor told you, but in the PEP "proper title" is well- defined and not very stringent: "accurately describes the content".
My goal for submitting the draft was to receive a PEP number to avoid the awkwardness of discussing a PEP without an obvious title. Perhaps PEP 1 should be revised to clarify the expectations for PEP submission.
Good point. That's definitely grounds for refusing to approve the PEP, but the approval criteria are in the section "PEP Editor Responsibilities & Workflow". I'm submitting a pull request (python/peps #789 on GitHub) to also put it in the section "Submitting a PEP", under the bullet "The PEP editors review your PR for structure, formatting, and other errors." Steve