Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

PEP 632: Remove Topic: Packaging header #2656

Merged

Conversation

pradyunsg
Copy link
Member

This removes the header, as requested by the author in #2636 (comment).

@pradyunsg pradyunsg requested a review from zooba as a code owner June 18, 2022 19:52
@cpython-cla-bot
Copy link

cpython-cla-bot bot commented Jun 18, 2022

All commit authors signed the Contributor License Agreement.
CLA signed

@pradyunsg pradyunsg force-pushed the remove-distutils-deprecation-from-packaging branch from b908cd4 to fea7b9f Compare June 18, 2022 19:53
@AA-Turner AA-Turner merged commit 0ffc781 into python:main Jun 18, 2022
@pradyunsg pradyunsg deleted the remove-distutils-deprecation-from-packaging branch June 18, 2022 22:05
@pradyunsg pradyunsg restored the remove-distutils-deprecation-from-packaging branch June 18, 2022 22:05
@pradyunsg pradyunsg deleted the remove-distutils-deprecation-from-packaging branch June 18, 2022 22:05
@pradyunsg pradyunsg restored the remove-distutils-deprecation-from-packaging branch June 18, 2022 22:05
@pradyunsg pradyunsg deleted the remove-distutils-deprecation-from-packaging branch June 18, 2022 22:05
@CAM-Gerlach
Copy link
Member

Rather unfortunate, considering it is of obvious interest and considerable importance to the packaging ecosystem as a whole, and the Topics are not (at least as originally construed) mutually-exclusive.

@AA-Turner
Copy link
Member

AA-Turner commented Jun 25, 2022

I merged as it seems @pradyunsg & others only wanted the packaging topic to be PyPA topics -- other PEPs that were to do with python packages, but not the business of packaging, were earlier removed too. Edit: I have no strong opinion either way, and I see the benefits of restricting to only packaging authority PEPs.

A

carljm added a commit to carljm/peps that referenced this pull request Jun 27, 2022
* main: (47 commits)
  PEP 668: Address feedback and mark as accepted (python#2673)
  PEP-0691 Gramatical changes + `meta` key description under Project List (python#2677)
  PEP691: Mark Accepted + Grammar Fixes + Small Fix (python#2674)
  PEP 691: touch up (python#2668)
  PEP 650: Withdraw and move to Standards Track (python#2665)
  PEP 561: Mark as final (python#2663)
  PEP 660: Mark as Final (python#2664)
  PEP 615: Fix incorrect RFC link (python#2662)
  Multiple PEPs: Move Packaging PEPs to Standards Track and mark as Final (python#2657)
  PEP 671: Since it keeps getting asked about, add a para on deferreds (python#2661)
  Infra: Tweak PEP references to work on topic sub-index pages (python#2658)
  PEP 632: Remove `Topic: Packaging` header (python#2656)
  Infra: Make colour theme cycler button accessible (python#2619)
  PEP 593: Fix citation references (python#2640)
  PEP 553: Fix citation references (python#2639)
  PEP 668: Add PEP-Delegate (python#2654)
  PEP 693: Python 3.12 Release Schedule (python#2648)
  Add support for topic indices (python#2579)
  PEP691: Switch to a List for Project, Address more Feedback (python#2653)
  PEP 671: Add section on evaluation order (python#2652)
  ...
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants