Infra: Use a list of authors in peps.json - #4226
Conversation
I'd vote for keeping |
|
From a cursory search, it seems the vast majority of instances of But sure, happy to add as a new field. The only negative would be the file size (~15% increase). A |
hugovk
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
From a cursory search, it seems the vast majority of instances of
peps.jsonin the wild are reproductions of the 723 example:
Here's a couple that would have broken (but I'm sure we could have convinced the authors to update :)
- https://github.com/brettcannon/brettcannon/blob/42eb826a969bd9430053193e3fb5f74a43b74f77/free-labour.py#L309
- https://github.com/JacobCoffee/byte/blob/336008fe8c42850d313c912f8e34a92bb02bffe4/byte_bot/byte/lib/utils.py#L430
But sure, happy to add as a new field. The only negative would be the file size (~15% increase).
Yep, I think 331K -> 368K is okay. Thanks!
peps.jsonpeps.json
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does typescript give nicer formatting than javascript?



Closes #4211.
Alternatively, we could just use a different seperator (
;)? Theauthorsfield ofpeps.jsonwas originally intended for literal reproduction without any re-parsing, hence why I joined the alreay-parsed list of authors into a string.A
📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://pep-previews--4226.org.readthedocs.build/peps.json