Message176508
| Author |
chris.jerdonek |
| Recipients |
Arfrever, chris.jerdonek, docs@python, eric.araujo, ezio.melotti, gvanrossum, mark.dickinson, terry.reedy |
| Date |
2012年11月28日.02:42:54 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1354070575.51.0.984187998795.issue15990@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
For some reason, Rietveld is erroring out every time I try to reply to one of the comments. So I am pasting the reply below:
[Issue in the Rietveld tracker here:
http://code.google.com/p/rietveld/issues/detail?id=394 ]
On 2012年11月26日 22:07:50, ezio.melotti wrote:
>
> Note that I took this from the pep. The pep could get the same clarification
> (unless I made it more confusing than it was).
From what I have observed, PEPs tend to be left alone after they are accepted. But that could simply be a misperception on my part. What is the process for updating PEPs and whose approval is needed, etc? In any case, that could be done as part of a separate issue. |
|