[Python-Dev] Re: Revamping Python's Numeric Model

Jeremy Hylton jeremy@alum.mit.edu
Sun, 5 Nov 2000 16:08:55 -0500 (EST)

[Comments from Greg and Moshe on the PEP process.]

I don't see the PEP process creating any impediments here.  There is
almost no process -- Barry assigns numbers to PEPs and Guido rules on
them.  We've got some rules about what must be in the PEP before it is
approved, but almost none about how the PEP is created.

There is nothing about the PEP process that prevents a healthy
discussion of issues, in private mail or on a mailing list (python-dev
or otherwise).  We had lots of comments on the statically nested
scopes PEP before Barry assigned it a number.  An entire PEP could be
created and discussed before it gets a number.

Someone may want to work on a PEP in privacy and wait to share it
until the entire document is complete; that's fine too, provided that
revisions are made based on feedback.

One goal we had when setting up the PEP process was to limit the
amount of repeated discussion on an issue.  It's not too uncommon for
email discussions to go in circles or to endlessly rehash the same few
issues.  We hoped that PEP authors would incorporate a discussion of
such issues in the PEP and reduce the amount of wasted bandwidth on
repetitive discussion.

Let's not waste time discussing how to create PEPs and instead
actually create them.  The clock is ticking for new features in 2.1;
the tentative deadline for new PEPs is mid-December.