[Numpy-discussion] NEP process update

Robert Kern robert.kern at gmail.com
Tue Dec 5 20:05:05 EST 2017

On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 9:49 AM, Nathaniel Smith <njs at pobox.com> wrote:

> - NEPs are really part of the development process, not an output for
> end-users -- they're certainly useful to have available as a
> reference, but if we're asking end-users to look at them on a regular
> basis then I think we've messed up and should improve our actual
> documentation :-)

I agree. The usefulness of NEPs (and PEPs) as documentation degrades over
time. The functionality matches the NEP at the time that it is accepted,
but features evolve over time through the normal, non-NEP development
process. Personally, I've frequently drove myself into corners reading a
PEP to learn about a new feature only to "learn" things that did not make
it into the final implementation or were quickly overtaken by later

We should not rely on NEPs to provide documentation for users. The regular
docs should be the authority. To the extent that the NEPs happen to provide
useful documentation for the new feature (and represent a significant
amount of sunk effort to draft that documentation), we should feel free to
copy-paste that into the regular docs and evolve it from there.

Robert Kern
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20171206/ffe355bd/attachment.html>

More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list