Coming back around: I’ve sent another PEP PR, this time marking PEP 740 as provisionally accepted: PEP 740: mark as provisional by woodruffw · Pull Request #3848 · python/peps · GitHub
Thank you to everyone who reviewed!
1 Like
Did I miss the message where @dstufft approved the PEP?
2 Likes
I had a call with him a couple of weeks ago, but I might have misunderstood the state transitions here (approval before provisional accept or vv.). I’ll take down that PR until there’s clarity; sorry for the confusion.
No worries.
Provisional acceptance is simply an alternate form of acceptance/approval - one in which the PEP is accepted, but there are conditions attached (for example “must be implemented in X number of tools”, or “details of (some part of the proposal) may be changed based on implementation experience”). A PEP changes state from Provisional to Final when the conditions have been met.
There’s a state transition diagram in PEP 1 if you want the details, although it’s written for language PEPs - the packaging PEP process is slightly different in some details, but the basic principles are the same.
Also, the request for a pronouncement on a PEP, and the PEP-delegate’s official response, are normally posted as messages here - even if they are simply reflecting a previous private conversation. In fact, on acceptance the PEP should be amended to include a Resolution: header with the URL of the PEP-delegate’s pronouncement, for future reference, so the acceptance must be a message with a permanent URL.
3 Likes
Okay, hopefully doing things right this time: there’s been no further discussion in the last 2 weeks, so I’m hereby requesting @dstufft’s approval of this PEP 
5 Likes
I’ve gone through and re-read all of the past discussion as well as the PEP itself. Given that nobody seems to have any real objection to this PEP, and the idea within it seem sound, I’m happy to provisionally accept this PEP.
14 Likes