Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> added the comment:
I like where you're going with this, but would be willing to write an update to PEP 432 to sketch out in advance what you now think the end state is going to look like? Merging the general structure of the draft PEP 432 implementation to make it possible to start migrating settings and see what's viable in practice has pretty much worked out as hoped, but we've diverged far enough from that structure now that we can't credibly claim to be working towards the current PEP draft as the new multi stage initialisation API. Changing the proposal (and adding yourself as a co-author) is fine - that was the whole point of enabling initial development as a private API in the first place. ---------- nosy: +lukasz.langa _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue35266> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
