# PEP 676: PEP Infrastructure Process

**URL:** <https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-676-pep-infrastructure-process/10774>\
**Category:** PEPs\
**Created:** [September 23, 2021, 12:14am UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-676-pep-infrastructure-process/10774 "2021-09-23T00:14:07Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 5

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![AA-Turner](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/aa-turner/32/4979_2.png) [@AA-Turner](https://discuss.python.org/u/AA-Turner)\
**Post date:** [September 23, 2021, 7:03pm UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-676-pep-infrastructure-process/10774/5 "2021-09-23T19:03:11Z")

</div>

> [@dustin](#):
>
> I wonder if there’s some middle ground here. I think there are advantages to having PEPs be part of `python.org` (e.g. they get the same “official” styling, links to the rest of `python.org`, etc).

I suppose it gets to the point of what `python.org` is intended for – if the website is primarily an advert for the project as a whole and the charity, then it may make sense (and I would argue that it does) to put PEPs on a subdomain also, similar to `docs.python.org`.

It seems at the monement that there seems to be a good precendent for hosting things on subdomains as opposed to the main site, but I guess PEPs might be “sufficiently different”, and warrant staying on the main website.

_list of subdomain things:_

- issue tracker (`bugs.python.org`)
- automatic builds (`buildbot.python.org`)
- developer’s guide (`devguide.python.org`)
- documentation (`docs.python.org`)
- email list archives (`mail.python.org`)
- packaging guide (`packaging.python.org`)
- performance statistics (`speed.python.org`)
- status (`status.python.org`)
- wiki (`wiki.python.org`)

> [@EWDurbin](#):
>
> My concern with trying to import the resulting documents into `python.org's` CMS, which is not a huge departure from what we do now, is that it then creates two places for this information… which is canonical?

I’d agree with this – there’s no point doing both, there should be one canonical source – for the reasons in my original paper I would favour `peps.python.org`, but we shouldn’t create that if we continue integrating into the main `python.org` website.

A

---

_[View the full topic](https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-676-pep-infrastructure-process/10774)._