[Python-Dev] Tidying up the Meta-PEP and Other Informational PEP sections of PEP 0

Nick Coghlan ncoghlan at gmail.com
Thu Jan 20 00:11:35 CET 2011

On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 4:40 AM, Barry Warsaw <barry at python.org> wrote:
> On Jan 19, 2011, at 12:16 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>>For the release schedule PEPs it means "done and dusted" (similar to
>>the meaning for ordinary PEPs). For the API standardisation PEPs (like
>>WSGI) it instead means the spec has been locked down and any changes
>>will require a new PEP. This caused a problem for the PEP 0 generator,
>>since the former kind of PEP should be moved to the new historical
>>section, while the latter kind should remain up top.
>>Would anyone object if I switched all the API definition PEPs to the
>>"Active" state? PEP 1 indicates that is the appropriate state for
>>reference PEPs that are never truly "finished" (in the sense of code
>>being implemented and committed to the source control system).
> Perhaps we need a new type for API PEPs instead?
> Type: API
> Type: Consensus
> ?
> If not, then I'd rather come up with a different status to describe an API PEP
> that has been locked down.  Re-using Active doesn't seem right to me.

Oh, I like "Consensus". I was going to suggest a new state, but I
couldn't think of any names I liked.

Hmm, guess I'll add "propose a revision to PEP 1" to the to-do list...


Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list