[Python-Dev] proposed amendments to PEP 1

[Aahz]

On Mon, Apr 28, 2003, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
>
> From these proposals and the annoucement earlier this week,
> I sense a desire to have fewer peps and to more rapidly get
> them out of the draft status.

There's some truth to that.  OTOH, until the BDFL declares something to
be an ex-PEP, I don't think BDFL rejection of a PEP means that it is
forever dead -- it just requires substantial revision to resurrect it.
The point of PEPs is to prevent rehashing of old subjects in the same
way, not to prevent new ideas from restarting discussions.
-- 
Aahz (aahz@pythoncraft.com)           <*>         http://www.pythoncraft.com/

"In many ways, it's a dull language, borrowing solid old concepts from
many other languages & styles:  boring syntax, unsurprising semantics,
few automatic coercions, etc etc.  But that's one of the things I like
about it."  --Tim Peters on Python, 16 Sep 93