On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 5:16 PM, Mark Hammond <mhamm...@skippinet.com.au> wrote: > On 21/03/2011 1:04 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote: >> >> Can you please add a summary of this discussion to >> the PEP? (also, can you please check in the PEP, and > >> give it a number?) > > OK, I'll check it in once I get a PEP number allocated as per PEP1, updated > to reflect some of the discussions in this thread.
We should really update PEP 1 at some point to say that people with commit rights are allowed to just grab the next number in the sequence (the source repository effectively prevents conflicts if two people happen to start PEPs at the same time). I've asked the PEP editors about that in the past, and they were fine with the practice. > Should I also check the reference implementation in? Maybe next to the PEP > text as "pep-NNNN-reference.py"? Generally the PEP directory is just for the PEPs themselves. Attaching scripts to tracker items is a fairly common way of publishing reference implementations, as is sticking them in an alternate repo somewhere. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
