On Jul 13, 2018, at 04:31, Nathaniel Smith <n...@pobox.com> wrote: > > I volunteer to co-author such a PEP. But I'm not up to doing it on my > own. So... who else wants to be a co-author? (I'm not going to > pressure anyone, but Brett, Mariatta, and Carol, please know that your > names were the first ones that jumped to my mind when thinking about > this :-).)
Count me in. Procedurally, I think an informational PEP numbered in sequence is a good place for the “design” of our governance. Once we’ve settled on a plan, we would capture the operational procedures in a new process PEP (I propose PEP 2), which would be our working document moving forward. I think it’s pretty much a certainty that whatever we come up with initially will undergo changes as time goes on and we gain experience. PEP 2 would then be the living document for our language governance process. -Barry
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ 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/
