This is a silly proposal with absolutely zero benefit, none that I can even see purported in the suggestion itself, let alone in reality.
On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 8:47 AM Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer < arj.pyt...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Kind Regards, > > Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer > about <https://compileralchemy.github.io/> | blog > <https://abdur-rahmaanj.github.io/> > github <https://github.com/Abdur-RahmaanJ> > Mauritius > > > On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 10:19 PM Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> PEPs don't get updated as future requirements cause changes in the >> language. They remain as they were: the proposal. Changing the name >> because of a change in the PEP's metadata seems like a very backwards >> way to do things; among other things, it would lead people to consider >> "PAPs" to be somehow authorative while "PEPs" are not, which would >> leave informational and process PEPs in an awkward situation of being >> neither non-accepted nor accepted, > > > I referred PEP8, a meta-pep as PAP8 in the first mail itself and should > have > been one of the first tripping lines of the discussion. If such PEPs are > included > under PAPs, the 'authorative' point holds as it should be > > >> Additionally, changing the *name* of a document >> means that every reference has to be changed, > > > I guess you mean on the website itself. It's a nice point which i was > expecting. > As with any change, some changes are expected and if i am not mistaken, > the source is some text documents and updating them means running a script > over them locally. > > >> The only advantage you've offered is some relatively weak notion that >> it ceases to be a proposal once it's accepted, and since "PAP" would >> still have the word "Proposal" in it, you're not really even changing >> that. >> > > > All law projects remain law projects. But we > call law projects which has been accepted as law. > > >> >> Let's not waste everyone's time for zero benefit. Thanks. >> >> ChrisA >> PEP editor who really doesn't feel like trying to support two names >> for the same things >> > > If we change even past accepted PEPs it's one name for one thing. > The thread dying off is in itself a sign that the idea is weak and > does not hold much value. But if someone brings a point that would re-start > the discussion i think it's better to notify him. I'm good if the thread > dies > off without any further input than rebringing what has already been told. > _______________________________________________ > Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org > To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ > Message archived at > https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/MGYDRF53XW5D3BAZABWOE2LXMQJHCCNP/ > Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/ > -- The dead increasingly dominate and strangle both the living and the not-yet born. Vampiric capital and undead corporate persons abuse the lives and control the thoughts of homo faber. Ideas, once born, become abortifacients against new conceptions.
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/O7AU4UOCHGQWXRQ6J6XP3TI5QEDKK6TD/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
