Many PEPs: Rename to .rst

[AA-Turner]

From #10, this is a less-invasive change of renaming to pep-????.rst but not moving directories.

Moving directories could be done, but I'd prefer to reach a conclusion on the other thread first.

A

[AA-Turner]

Sorry for review request spam, I misclicked and opened as a live PR.

A

[CAM-Gerlach]

To note, this will require some linting changes (which I can help with). The rst-backticks linter identified a bunch of bad backticks (pretty much all true positives based on a spot check), which either need to be fixed (ideal, but non-trivial work for someone) or temporarily ignored (e.g. by filename range). Likewise, and there are two variations of the email format linter, one that allows the old parenthesis format and one that doesn't, which for convenience I based off the extension—ideally, we likewise conform the old ones to the new format (because of the existing validation, it should be possible with a regex), but if not we have to use filename ranges or a list of filenames to apply one linter or the other.

If we move the PEPs, there will need to be some additional tweaks, some less mechanical but likely much less total time overall than this, and allow dropping the custom name filtering plugin and perhaps a few other bits of config.

[CAM-Gerlach]

Also, just curious—in BrE, does "several" mean "hundreds"? To an AmE speaker, calling 440 PEPs "several" (as opposed to e.g. "Many") seems very odd indeed, but I know you Brits do things differently across the pond...

[terryjreedy]

Two dictionaries I tried defined 'several' as more than a few but fewer than many. American English is standard for Python. 'Rename multiple PEPs to .rst' might be even better. The committer ultimately decides on titles.

[CAM-Gerlach]

'Rename multiple PEPs to .rst' might be even better.

Or better yet, Rename all .txt PEPs to .rst, since that describes much more clearly the exact nature and scope of the change.

Of course, that depends on what we decide on #10 ...

[brettcannon]

What should we do about this PR?

[ethanfurman]

What should we do about this PR?

If this PR includes the changes mentioned by @CAM-Gerlach then I would suggest merging it.

[CAM-Gerlach]

Unfortunately it doesn't; the move needs to be re-done, there are several more things that need to be dealt with regardless separately and don't depend on this PR but do block it (converting the remaining legacy-formatted author names and fixing instances of bad backticks), tweaking a few other things and also addressing the main delta from the general consensus on #10, which was to also move them into a peps subdirectory and would allow simplifying some things further. We would also want to have as few PRs in flight as practical during the move to minimize

I was going to start addressing the legacy-email formatting and backtick syntax issues in separate PRs (since those need to be fixed anyway and should be done first, to make the actual PEP that does the move as lean as possible). At that point we can then move ahead with this, either here or in a fresh PR.

[brettcannon]

Since this is just going to potentially drift even farther out of sync with main I suggest we close it.

[ethanfurman]

Closing. Once the background work has been completed this can be revisited (or a new PR created).