Skip to content

New PEP Editors? #5080

Description

@hugovk

Some PEPs aren't being reviewed as quickly as we'd like and can sit waiting for review before merge for too long. This holds up PEP discussion, which can be challenging enough for authors.

@StanFromIreland and @ZeroIntensity have volunteered to join the PEP Editor team.

What do @python/pep-editors think?

Activity

  1. added
    metaRelated to the repo itself and its processes
    on Aug 6, 2026
  2. golukhanr343-ops commented on Aug 15, 2026

    @golukhanr343-ops
  3. golukhanr343-ops commented on Aug 15, 2026

    @golukhanr343-ops
  4. Rosuav commented on Aug 15, 2026

    @Rosuav
    Contributor

    I don't have any objection to either of them. But as to the PEP review question, I can say something else: It's VERY easy for the notification emails to get lost. I'm here now a week after you posted this issue and am reacting to the two notifications for outright spam.

    So maybe - orthogonally to the question of more editors - what we need is a viable workflow. Part of the problem is that some of the current issues have been going back and forth quite a bit, legitimately, which means that "there's an issue that's been open for several days" isn't an immediately-obvious flag.

    For my part, I'm going to try to keep a closer eye on the Issues/PRs tabs, and will look over what's there right now; but maybe we need to be more aggressive about flagging things as drafts if they're not ready, and then anything that hasn't had any activity in a week should be checked over to see why.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    metaRelated to the repo itself and its processes

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions