PEP 599: manylinux2014 PEP

[di]

Discussion is here: https://discuss.python.org/t/the-next-manylinux-specification/

Accidentally approved a single commit

[di]

@brettcannon Did you mean to approve the entire PR?

[brettcannon]

@di if you look at the issue history you will see I dismissed my review with the comment "accidentally approved" 😁 .

[di]

This has been open for 1 week without additional comments. Can someone assign this a PEP # and merge? @brettcannon / @pfmoore / @ncoghlan?

[brettcannon]

@di at this point you just need to add a sponsor.

[di]

@pfmoore, are you willing to act as "sponsor" here?

[pfmoore]

Given that I'm deciding between the 2 alternative proposals, is that appropriate? @brettcannon what's your view here? If it's OK for the BDFL-delegate to also be the sponsor, I'm fine with sponsoring this (although I'd have to say, I'm not entirely sure what the role of sponsor involves).

[di]

PEP 1 says:

The sponsor's job is to provide guidance to the PEP author to help them through the logistics of the PEP process (somewhat acting like mentor). For the core developer sponsoring, being a sponsor does not disqualify them from becoming a co-author or BDFL-Delegate later on

So, more or less a formality here it seems, given that the "PEP process" is mostly completed.

[brettcannon]

@pfmoore as @di quoted, a sponsor acts as a mentor/guide to someone going through the PEP process. You could be totally for/against the PEP and still be a sponsor to help Dustin with the overall process.

[pfmoore]

Cool - @di I'm happy to be the sponsor in that case.

[ncoghlan]

Assigning 599 and 600 to this PEP and the perennial manylinux proposal.