On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 4:51 PM, Ivan Levkivskyi <levkivs...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 18 May 2018 at 19:46, Gregory P. Smith <g...@krypto.org> wrote: >> >> >> I'm all for picking a victom^Wvolunteer PEP to try dogfood it on. >> > > Can few related PEPs share the same repository? For example, I want to start > writing three PEPs about extensions to PEP 484 type system: literal types, > final/const qualifier, and integer generics (simple dependent types). > They all are tightly connected (but I don't want a single mega-PEP), can I > put these three in the same repo?
Another common pattern we see with trickier PEPs is the creation of multiple competing proposals. This strikes me as healthy and something we want to encourage. Maybe these should also go in the same repo by default? This is also a case where assigning PEP numbers earlier rather than later seems useful. Unambiguously referring to PEP 521, PEP 550, PEP 567, and PEP 568 would be difficult without the numbers :-). -n -- Nathaniel J. Smith -- https://vorpus.org _______________________________________________ python-committers mailing list python-committers@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
