On 03. 11. 21 12:33, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
03.11.21 12:36, Petr Viktorin пише:
On 03. 11. 21 2:58, Kyle Stanley wrote:
I'd suggest both: briefer, easier to read write up for average user in
docs, more details/semantics in informational PEP. Thanks for working
on this, Petr!
Well, this is the brief write-up :)
Maybe it would work better if the info was integrated into the relevant
parts of the docs, rather than be a separate HOWTO.
I went with an informational PEP because it's quicker to publish.
What is the supposed target audience of this document?
Good question! At this point it looks like it's linter authors.
If it is core
Python developers only, then PEP is the right place to publish it. But I
think that it rather describes potential issues in arbitrary Python
project, and as such, it will be more accessible as a part of the Python
documentation (as a HOW-TO article perhaps). AFAIK all other
informational PEPs are about developing Python, not developing in Python
(even if they are (mis)used (e.g. PEP 8) outside their scope).
There's a bunch of packaging PEPs, or a PEP on what the the
/usr/bin/python command should be. I think PEP 672 is in good company
for now.
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/UTNIZZVWL56G7KSYSS67PYYZ2YPE7NX3/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
