PEPs should be included with the documentation download

[Terry Reedy]

On 8/21/2013 1:32 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Aseem Bansal <asmbansal2 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Currently the documentation download includes a lot of things but PEPs are not its part. I wanted to suggest that PEPs should be included in the download. They are very much relevant to Python.
>
> The PEPs are kinda like the specs that Python is built from, rather
> than being end-user documentation; certainly most, if not all, are
> unnecessary to most use of Python. There's really no point downloading
> a whole pile of rejected PEPs as part of the crucial user-facing docs.

The manuals are intended to document current reality. Accepted PEPs 
document plans, often minus details. They do not get updated to reflect 
the initial implementation, let alone subsequent changes. Thus even

There are a few chapters in the manual that reference a PEP, either 
because the details are though to be too esoteric for the manual or 
becuase no one has yet gotten around to rewriting the material for the 
manual. (In the latter case, a patch should be welcome.) So there might 
be a reason to include a '(Highly) Selected PEPs' heading to the main 
page. PEP 8 might be a candidate, though it was originally intended as 
an internal style guide for the stdlib only.

-- 
Terry Jan Reedy