Skip to content

Conversation

@ZeroIntensity
Copy link
Member

@ZeroIntensity ZeroIntensity commented Aug 8, 2025

Basic requirements (all PEP Types)

  • Read and followed PEP 1 & PEP 12
  • File created from the latest PEP template
  • PEP has next available number, & set in filename (pep-NNNN.rst), PR title (PEP 123: <Title of PEP>) and PEP header
  • Title clearly, accurately and concisely describes the content in 79 characters or less
  • Core dev/PEP editor listed as Author or Sponsor, and formally confirmed their approval
  • Author, Status (Draft), Type and Created headers filled out correctly
  • PEP-Delegate, Topic, Requires and Replaces headers completed if appropriate
  • Required sections included
    • Abstract (first section)
    • Copyright (last section; exact wording from template required)
  • Code is well-formatted (PEP 7/PEP 8) and is in code blocks, with the right lexer names if non-Python
  • PEP builds with no warnings, pre-commit checks pass and content displays as intended in the rendered HTML
  • Authors/sponsor added to .github/CODEOWNERS for the PEP

Standards Track requirements

  • PEP topic discussed in a suitable venue with general agreement that a PEP is appropriate
  • Suggested sections included (unless not applicable)
    • Motivation
    • Rationale
    • Specification
    • Backwards Compatibility
    • Security Implications
    • How to Teach This
    • Reference Implementation
    • Rejected Ideas
    • Open Issues
  • Python-Version set to valid (pre-beta) future Python version, if relevant
  • Any project stated in the PEP as supporting/endorsing/benefiting from the PEP formally confirmed such
  • Right before or after initial merging, PEP discussion thread created and linked to in Discussions-To and Post-History

📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://pep-previews--4536.org.readthedocs.build/pep-0797/

@ZeroIntensity ZeroIntensity requested a review from a team as a code owner August 8, 2025 16:54
@brianschubert brianschubert added the new-pep A new draft PEP submitted for initial review label Aug 8, 2025
@ZeroIntensity ZeroIntensity changed the title PEP 797: Shared Object Proxies for Subinterpreters PEP 797: Shared Object Proxies Nov 27, 2025
@ZeroIntensity
Copy link
Member Author

Ok, I finally got back to this one.

@AA-Turner Following the discussion I had with Yury at the core sprint, I realized this works without immortality at all, which should resolve your concerns regarding the "context ID" thing and other implementation details. I rewrote the whole proposal with your comments in mind; could you take a second look?

@ZeroIntensity
Copy link
Member Author

Friendly bump 🙂

ZeroIntensity and others added 4 commits January 3, 2026 14:55
Co-authored-by: Adam Turner <9087854+AA-Turner@users.noreply.github.com>
I don't really know what this was supposed to do anyway.
@ZeroIntensity ZeroIntensity requested a review from a team January 13, 2026 13:39
Co-authored-by: Hugo van Kemenade <1324225+hugovk@users.noreply.github.com>
@ZeroIntensity ZeroIntensity merged commit 1eab7c2 into python:main Jan 13, 2026
5 checks passed
@ZeroIntensity ZeroIntensity deleted the shared-object-proxies branch January 13, 2026 18:40
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

new-pep A new draft PEP submitted for initial review

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants