The SC wasn't really explicit in the linked issue about whether they were OK with me as a sponsor in this particular case or whether they agree on the general principle, so let's leave this for @warsaw to confirm it's what they want.

PR 2112 🤘

@JelleZijlstra Yes, we are okay with you being a sponsor in this particular case. Hopefully this PR clarifies the general case now too.

@JelleZijlstra

The SC wasn't really explicit in the linked issue about whether they were OK with me as a sponsor in this particular case or whether they agree on the general principle, so let's leave this for @warsaw to confirm it's what they want.

This comment in the original thread looks pretty unambiguous -- they were okay with you (Jelle) being sponsor on a specific PEP. As Barry repeated above. Fortunately they are now also okay with the general case. Congrats!

(Now I'm looking forward to the actual PEP, which is about using +T or -T as a way to use a TypeVar in a covariant or contravariant position; I haven't heard much about it since that thread was started.)

@gvanrossum You can find the current version at jorenham#2, any feedback is welcome :)