Re: gep-2 redux, and gep naming

[Malcolm Tredinnick <malcolm commsecure com au>]

On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 09:09:19PM +0100, Bill Haneman wrote:
[...]
> But I wonder, wouldn't it be nice to revise the GEP numbering system to
> include the category?  For instance,
> 
> gep-2R would be a requirements spec, gep-2A would be the subsequent
> action proposal... action-only geps would have no corresponding 'R'.
> 
> It would be one less thing to remember (e.g. which req-s gep refers to
> which action gep, etc.) without having to consult the gep content...

Looking at the Python world of PEPs, the lack of categories has not
really crippled it there. They have things like PEPs-about-PEPs
(meta-PEPs), policy PEPs, specific proposed changes (our action PEPs),
etc.

The thing that has kept it usable is that there is a clear index page of
all the PEPs, grouped by category and status (open, rejected, old, etc).

Malcolm