(original) (raw)
On 30 April 2018 at 18:11, Victor Stinner <vstinner@redhat.com> wrote:
We edit PEP 394 in place for the same reason we edit PEP 8 in place: so people have a consistent place to get our current recommendations.2018-04-27 17:37 GMT+02:00 Petr Viktorin <encukou@gmail.com>:
\> (...)
> - The paragraph about the anticipated future where python points to Python 3
\> is removed.
Instead of editing old PEPs, would it make sense to write a new one
which replaces the old one?
The PEP 394 has been written in 2011 and accepted in 2012\. Editing an
accepted PEP makes it harder to dig into the history of PEPs.
I know that the PEP 8 is updated regularly, so it's not a requirement,
just a proposal for the special PEP 394.
It isn't like a packaging interoperability spec or the Python language & library specs, where folks regularly need to know what changed between particular revisions.
If folks really want to know how the recommendations have changed over time, then browsing https://github.com/python/peps/commits/master/pep-0394.txt isn't overly difficult.
(That said, I also wouldn't be opposed to adding an inline change log to the PEP, since it helps highlights the cases where the recommendations \*have\* changed, which can be helpful for folks that were already familiar with the older versions)
Cheers,
Nick.