Since we are currently talking about the future of typeshed, there is
another idea that's been floating around, and which was somewhat
discussed in the past. In an ideal world, packages would maintain and
ship their own type stubs (using the py.typed marker). At the moment is
not realistic at all. I would categorize package projects into three groups:
* Projects that already ship their own type stubs and have the
knowledge to do so. Perfect.
* Projects that are not interested in type stubs and have no interest
in maintaining them. This is fine and their stubs can be maintained
and distributed with typeshed.
* Projects that are interested in shipping their own stubs, but are
lacking the knowledge or tools to do so.
The third group is what this idea is aimed at: I'd like to provide some
kind of "Type School", where interested maintainers can ask for reviews
of the stubs they want to add to their own project by typeshed
maintainers or other interested and skilled parties. This way, we could
nudge projects towards the first group and at the same time increase the
user experience for end users, by not needing to install a type package.
The easiest way to implement this is probably to add a issue template to
typeshed for exactly that purpose. People could then review the linked
PR and close the issue in typeshed. More sophisticated solutions are
also possible, of course.
I wonder what other people think about this.
- Sebastian