Splitting out the packaging PEPs, on the PEP site

[dustin (Dustin Ingram)]

@CAM-Gerlach

Could you point us to the specific comment there where this was discussed? At least skimming through, I couldn’t find it.

It seems to me like what @pradyunsg is proposing is similar to @pganssle’s option #1 in the OP of that thread:

@pganssle

1. Use essentially the same PEP process, but in a different namespace (e.g. PPEP - Python Packaging Enhancement Proposals) and with our preferred rules for who can propose them.

and what I suggested here:

@dustin

Would it make sense to use a combination of #1 and #2? I.e., add a Track: Packaging header to all packaging-related PEPs