[please see http://bugs.debian.org/163703] The bug submitter complains, that the information found in accepted PEPs like 252 and 253 cannot be found in the "standard documentation" and proposes, that accepted PEPs are included in the standard documentation.
Logged In: YES user_id=31392 I don't think PEPs themselves should be included in the documentation, but the relevant spec info should go into the docs in an appropriate location. I think leaving the rationale/discussion part in the PEP is good.
Logged In: YES user_id=31392 Well it's not a question of cutting and pasting the spec part of a PEP into the reference manual. The documentation changes, particularly for PEPs 252 and 253, are fairly substantial and involve a lot more than moving some text around. (I'd wager that what counts as standard features and what is experimental isn't entirely clear.) To sum up, I don't think there's much point keeping a bug report open for this unless there are a specific set of PEPs with tractable documentation to move around.
Logged In: YES user_id=3066 I agree with Jeremy. If something is described in a PEP and implemented, documentation is necessary. For each such case, a separate documentation bug should be filed. This is especially valuable since I don't have time to follow PEP development these days. Specific bug reports would be very helpful, and can get things moving a little quicker. Such a report should include: - what isn't documented - where you think documentation should be added (possibly multiple locations) - what the documentation should say (a reference to a PEP, email message, or a patch would all be good), if possible. I'm closing this report and anxiously awaiting a deluge of very specific and helpful reports. Thanks, Volunteer Matthias! ;-)
