From f5c68a1f4c6510a7d5f534131cfd48efd6137a50 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "C.A.M. Gerlach" Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2022 20:01:52 -0600 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] PEP 1: Update outdated language referring to Travis CI --- pep-0001.txt | 23 +++++++++++------------ 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) diff --git a/pep-0001.txt b/pep-0001.txt index 492cda199e1..c475bdd1620 100644 --- a/pep-0001.txt +++ b/pep-0001.txt @@ -204,10 +204,9 @@ The standard PEP workflow is: editors do not consider whether they seem likely to be accepted. * The title accurately describes the content. * The PEP's language (spelling, grammar, sentence structure, etc.) - and code style (examples should match :pep:`8` & :pep:`7`) should be - correct and conformant. The PEP will be checked for formatting - (plain text or reStructuredText) by Travis CI, and will not be - approved until this passes. + and code style (examples should match :pep:`7` & :pep:`8`) should be + correct and conformant. The PEP will be checked for reStructuredText + formatting by the repo's CIs, and will not be approved until this passes. Editors are generally quite lenient about this initial review, expecting that problems will be corrected by the reviewing process. @@ -520,7 +519,7 @@ PEP Formats and Templates ========================= PEPs are UTF-8 encoded text files using the reStructuredText_ format. -ReStructuredText_ allows for rich markup that is still quite easy to +reStructuredText allows for rich markup that is still quite easy to read, but also results in good-looking and functional HTML. :pep:`12` contains instructions and a :pep:`template <12#suggested-sections>` for reStructuredText PEPs. @@ -602,11 +601,11 @@ Discussions-To header will not be obscured. The Type header specifies the type of PEP: Standards Track, Informational, or Process. -The format of a PEP is specified with a Content-Type header. The -acceptable values are "text/plain" for plaintext PEPs (see :pep:`9`) -and "text/x-rst" for reStructuredText PEPs (see :pep:`12`). -reStructuredText is strongly preferred, but for backwards -compatibility plain text is currently still the default if no +The format of a PEP is specified with a Content-Type header. +Valid values are ``text/plain`` for plaintext PEPs (see :pep:`9`) +and ``text/x-rst`` for reStructuredText PEPs (see :pep:`12`). +All new and active PEPs must use reStructuredText, but for backwards +compatibility, plain text is currently still the default if no Content-Type header is present. The Created header records the date that the PEP was assigned a @@ -718,8 +717,8 @@ For each new PEP that comes in an editor does the following: * Skim the PEP for obvious defects in language (spelling, grammar, sentence structure, etc.), and code style (examples should conform to - :pep:`8` & :pep:`7`). Editors may correct problems themselves, but are - not required to do so. (Text format is checked by Travis CI.) + :pep:`7` & :pep:`8`). Editors may correct problems themselves, but are + not required to do so (reStructuredText syntax is checked by the repo's CIs). * If a project is portrayed as benefiting from or supporting the PEP, make sure there is some direct indication from the project included to make the support From f4ec7e917176d32c492d3c8da9ad84fffbf14dba Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: CAM Gerlach Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2022 21:31:41 -0600 Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Further revise PEP 1 CI wording based on reviewer suggestions Co-authored-by: Adam Turner <9087854+AA-Turner@users.noreply.github.com> --- pep-0001.txt | 7 ++++--- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/pep-0001.txt b/pep-0001.txt index c475bdd1620..9e491b2f04e 100644 --- a/pep-0001.txt +++ b/pep-0001.txt @@ -205,8 +205,9 @@ The standard PEP workflow is: * The title accurately describes the content. * The PEP's language (spelling, grammar, sentence structure, etc.) and code style (examples should match :pep:`7` & :pep:`8`) should be - correct and conformant. The PEP will be checked for reStructuredText - formatting by the repo's CIs, and will not be approved until this passes. + correct and conformant. The PEP text will be automatically checked for + correct reStructuredText formatting when the pull request is submitted. + PEPs with invalid reST markup will not be approved. Editors are generally quite lenient about this initial review, expecting that problems will be corrected by the reviewing process. @@ -718,7 +719,7 @@ For each new PEP that comes in an editor does the following: * Skim the PEP for obvious defects in language (spelling, grammar, sentence structure, etc.), and code style (examples should conform to :pep:`7` & :pep:`8`). Editors may correct problems themselves, but are - not required to do so (reStructuredText syntax is checked by the repo's CIs). + not required to do so (reStructuredText syntax is checked by the repo's CI). * If a project is portrayed as benefiting from or supporting the PEP, make sure there is some direct indication from the project included to make the support