That just circles back around to the issue that people actually wanted to get the warnings, but then selectively silence any that weren’t an issue. Silencing all syntax warnings still subverts part of why people were using it without actually providing an alternative.
It also turned caching into no longer being transparent to users. It’s a behavioral change, rather than just a performance tradeoff, and didn’t work as the authors expected for default visibility because uv isn’t caching by default, nor is there a standard that says they should.
The caching bit is actually the part that’s probably most agreed upon as not working as presented. Others chimed in on that detail as well, and these are among the most agreed with posts about the actual behavior of the pep in the entire thread, by the measure discourse gives, for whatever that’s worth.
Long story short, no, I don’t count that as fufilling the ability to filter warnings, the pep doesn’t present it that way either. the pep never even made that argument, and prior to people coming in with actual issues once implemented, it was only presented in discussion of the pep as a way to claim only the library authors would see it by default, without taking the full ecosystem into account.