Moving to packaging.python.org as the canonical Python packaging standards reference

This has been something we’ve wanted to do for a while, and it’s not happened yet. I wanna chart a path onward to getting us there, now that Packaging PEPs | peps.python.org is a thing.

AFAICT, this means that we should:

Are there any broad strokes concerns with this plan?

6 Likes

None from me, other than the usual “I’m pretty sure this has been the plan for ages now, but no-one has had the time to actually do the work” :slightly_smiling_face:

2 Likes

Poking this again, to give folks another chance to chime in before I start putting a concentrated effort toward this.

I say go for it and don’t wait. I’ve not heard anyone actually object to this overall idea and there’s been plenty of time to speak up (well beyond this thread’s lifetime).

2 Likes

AFAIK, after years of discussion of this, the only reason I know why it hasn’t happened was a simple lack of someone both able and willing to put the requisite Sphinx, technical writing, PEP/spec and packaging time, effort and expertise toward the problem. Now that we nearly simultaneously and independently have two such people, it seems the only question becomes how we’re going to most efficiently do the work :slight_smile: — see my comment over on the issue.

And the PR, pypa/packaging.python.org#1111, for migrating PEP 517/518/660, is now live!