I haven’t seen any recommendations being made (perhaps they’re happening on the PRs?), but I like having at least the initial text of the PEP proposal being posted in the context of the discussion. A PEP post should be very close to final review, not the early in-depth discussions.
I also prefer not reviewing PEPs until at least a sponsor has acknowledged it. Until then, it’s merely an idea, and not a proposal. (Roughly the difference between a discussion on python-ideas vs. python-dev, under the old mailing lists, though clearly that doesn’t make as much sense in the Packaging category.)
If PEP editors are reviewing the initial text and assigning a PEP number, and letting it be published on python.org, then in my mind they are now the sponsor. The point of requiring a sponsor is to prevent things getting to that stage without at least one “responsible person” (currently/previously defined as “a core dev”, though Packaging doesn’t and shouldn’t use that precise definition) signing off on the general quality of the proposal text and the fact that it’s at least been approved by initial discussions.