Éric Araujo added the comment: I think the gist here is that “in general” is good enough, given that there is unwritten consensus about what edits are possible in the developers’ heads. Most of the time unwritten knowledge is not good, but (if I get what Martin and Barry mean correctly) for PEP rules this is fine. We don’t want an over-detailed or inflexible process.
About the mail from Nick: it was talking about writing a new informational PEP, so I don’t see the link with final standards track PEPs. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue16574> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
