[Python-Dev] PEP 1 update (original) (raw)

Samuele Pedroni pedroni@inf.ethz.ch
Thu, 28 Feb 2002 19:22:40 +0100

[Ahz Maruch]

After looking at several PEPs over the last couple of days, I suggest that PEP 1 be updated to require inclusion of the Last-Modified: field. At the very least, I suggest that Post-History: be checked more rigorously. (PEP 263 contains a Post-History: field, but it is blank.) I don't think it's necessary to retrofit every PEP, but I think that every PEP up for consideration should be required to comply. --

From some post son comp.lang.python it seems that people has some problem keeping track of PEPs and understand their status /iter:

I know what the PEP 1 says but anyway the PEP summary and PEP headers don't seem to properly and completely capture the right information needed to make sense for a casual reader.

Another problem is that there are PEPs that have multiple phases but are marked has finished just because the main changes are implemented (division changes)

and PEPs with important changes already done that are reported somehow just as unimplemented .

Even Alex Martelli was wondering what was happing e.g. with PEP 246 (I think it has solved that at IPC10).

Just my impressions.

regards, Samuele Pedroni.