[Doc-SIG] suggestions for a PEP

Ken Manheimer klm@digicool.com
Tue, 13 Mar 2001 13:20:08 -0500 (EST)

> To: doc-sig@python.org
> Subject: Re: [Doc-SIG] suggestions for a PEP
> Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2001 20:49:08 EST
> From: "Edward D. Loper" <edloper@gradient.cis.upenn.edu>
> [...]
> So I'll try to write up a PEP when I get a chance.  It sounds like
> Tibbs might write a proposal too.  I think that Tibbs and I seem
> to have similar views on a lot of issues, so if we want diversity
> in our PEPs, maybe someone else should work on one too. :)  (Of 
> course, this sort of seems like redundant work, but I guess it's
> for the best or something)

I may be misguided here, but my impression is that it's not a goal to have
more PEPs.  Rather, the idea is to allow for multiple PEPs that convey
competing viewpoints when competing viewpoints exist.  If you diverge just
in marginal particulars, you can present the particulars as alternatives,
with explanation about their relative merits.  In general, if it's
suitable for you and tibbs to do a joint PEP, and you'd be comfy with it,
it sounds like the PEP might be the stronger for it.

Ken Manheimer