In my humble opinion, this doesn't warrant the creation of a new structure, but
rather a restructuring of PEPs.
As mentioned by others, we have a "Rejected Ideas" section already, but that
seems to somewhat miss the point. It captures only the arguments that have won,
arguments moved against specific parts of the PEP which have managed to
overthrow that specific part.
I propose to expand this into a section (call it Anti-PEP if you like, though
I'd prefer something less arcane myself) that systematically approaches every
argument moved against the PEP as a whole and any specific part of it,
signalling the state of each objection (updated on a schedule, perhaps).
This would achieve:
- Keeping everyone informed at a glance on every objection.
- Prevent duplicate objections, as you'd be aware of similar objections to the
one you want to raise and have your voice be heard there.
- Put all the pros and cons in one place, clearly labelled.
- Give a better overview of the objective arguments for and against: I believe
subjective and emotional motivations would end up being compressed by the
format in a way that would make it clear whether there is any value to them.
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/WP4NP36TFXUWTJPMPU7KR6IFZ4VTK5E7/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
