It looks like this "bubble" effect is one of the topics we should address at the typing meetup (Thursday April 28 at PyCon). I am supposed to be organizing a panel on the interaction between typing-sig and the core dev community, with Jelle and Greg and a few typing-sig regulars.
> Am 24.03.22 um 17:31 schrieb Guido van Rossum:
> [typing-sig delegation]
>> I would be happy to do it. I personally do not believe that experience
>> as a PEP editor is an important skill when reviewing PEPs from the POV
>> or accepting or rejecting them -- making sure the markup is correct,
>> the grammar flows and the required sections are present is up to the
>> whole PEP editor team (of which I am a founding member also -- but I
>> have few Sphinx skills).
I fully agree -- the task here is to *fairly summarize typing-sig
discussions*, and that is not the job of a PEP editor.
That's not saying any particular PEP editor couldn't do it, of course!
It seems that Guido and Jelle are well trusted in these circles, so next
time there's a typing PEP, I'll suggest the SC members to just ask one
them rather than read/skim typing-sig discussions. Even better if the
PEP authors get a statement from one of them before asking the SC for
This is not a full delegation like we have for packaging. There's some
worry in the SC that typing-sig is a bit of a bubble, and the effect on
the rest of the language/ecosystem isn't considered as well as it could.
I encourage the "typing-sig mini-SC" to do one more thing in addition to
summarizing the discussion: predict (or ask for) the issues the SC would
raise, and make the PEP authors consider them. If we're consistently on
the same page, a standing delegation would be reasonable.
Petr (not officially speaking for the SC this time)