Mark various accepted PEPs as Final#4986
Conversation
ZeroIntensity
requested review from
Fidget-Spinner,
JelleZijlstra,
ambv,
brettcannon,
dstufft,
encukou,
erlend-aasland,
isidentical,
lysnikolaou,
pablogsal,
sethmlarson,
warsaw and
zooba
as code owners
Documentation build overview
710 files changed ·
|
| Sponsor: Łukasz Langa <lukasz at python.org> | ||
| Discussions-To: https://discuss.python.org/t/22606 | ||
| Status: Accepted | ||
| Status: Final |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure if this was meant to stay non-final until free-threading is the default.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure if there was any prior discussion, but personally, I think it makes more sense to mark PEP 703 as final (especially considering PEP 779 is marked final as well). There will almost certainly be a separate PEP that makes FT the default.
|
Thanks for the nudge! For my 3.15 PEPs (793, 803, 820), I want to go through them once again and note any surprises and changes found during implementation. Since there will be some of that, I want to get SC approval before marking them Final. |
| Author: Brett Cannon <brett@python.org> | ||
| Discussions-To: https://discuss.python.org/t/94567 | ||
| Status: Accepted | ||
| Status: Final |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is not final yet; tools have not rolled out support.
4 participants
I didn't touch PEPs that already have a PR marking them as final. For the packaging PEPs, I only finalized those that already have a
.. canonical-pypa-specmarker. I don't know enough about packaging to dig through the spec and find links for the others.