PEP 1: Diagram includes the non-existent "Replaced" state

[ncoghlan]

I'm currently talking with a process management researcher, and asked them why their nominal process flow has a "Replaced" state in it.

Turns out they took it straight from the diagram in PEP 1: https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0001/#pep-review-resolution

The "Superseded" box is labeled as "Replaced". That part of the diagram is weird anyway, as it's more likely to be Active PEPs that go to Superseded than Final ones.

[warsaw]

The "Superseded" box is labeled as "Replaced". That part of the diagram is weird anyway, as it's more likely to be Active PEPs that go to Superseded than Final ones.

I'm not sure about that. IIRC, the original intent of this was something like the RFC 822 -> 2822 -> 5822 evolution. The idea being that further refinement of an already implemented (i.e. Final) PEP would include a Superseded link back to the original PEP.

Replaces is a little weird to me. I would change that to Supersedes.

[Jamim]

Hello @ncoghlan and @warsaw,

I would change that to Supersedes.

Just in case, I'd like to point out that it looks like you are talking about different parts of the PEP-1.
So not only Replaces should be changed to Supersedes, but Replaced should be changed to Superseded as well.

[ncoghlan]

Yeah, there are two inconsistencies. The "Replaced" state in the diagram is just outright wrong, as there's no such state (it's called "Superseded" in the PEP text).

The fact that the fields creating those doubly linked lists of PEPs are "Replaces" and "Superseded-By" is odd, but not wrong per se.

[pradyunsg]

Are the sources for those files available in the repository?

[ncoghlan]

The png is exported from the svg at https://github.com/python/peps/blob/master/pep-0001/process_flow.svg

We don't use the svg directly due to #701

[AA-Turner]

Linking #2 here // PEP 676 re svg support

[AA-Turner]

(turns out I can't link an issue in the UI, only PRs. Anyway the point stands!)
A

[CAM-Gerlach]

(turns out I can't link an issue in the UI, only PRs. Anyway the point stands!)

In terms of the "linked issues"/"linked pull requests" feature, the purpose is to establish a more formal mechanism to allow merged PRs to close issues (though unfortunately, you can no longer have merged PRs close other PRs, which I believe used to work and is often useful).

[AA-Turner]

#2542 contains some recent discussion on updating this diagram.

A

[CAM-Gerlach]

Ah, I thought there was an issue about that somewhere, but somehow managed to miss this one...

[Jamim]

I believe it's about time to fix this 😅

• PEP 1: Fix "Superseded" status in a diagram #3725

[Jamim]

Hello @AA-Turner,
Would you mind reviewing #3725 which fixes this issue?
Thanks in advance!