On Wed, Aug 21, 2013, at 13:32, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Aseem Bansal <asmbans...@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. > > Also, how many people actually depend on the downloadable > documentation, rather than simply reading things online?
If you've taken your laptop to somewhere there's no wi-fi, it's nice to have offline help. I think, though, that if there's any useful information that can be obtained by reading accepted PEPs but not the documentation, or if things are explained less clearly than in the PEPs, that's a bug in the documentation, and should be remedied by adding to the documentation. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
