I haven't either, but I'm -0 on changing existing PEPs. I don't see much value in changing this header for closed PEPs, and I would leave it to PEP authors to update their own active PEPs if they want.

That said, I think we should update PEP 1 to use the term PEP-Delegate, enforce that term in new PEPs, and encourage (but not force) active PEP authors to update their own PEPs.

So the pep tooling will need to recognize both headers? And have a list of PEPs that are allowed to have the old header?

The former, but not the latter. We already have enough process and policy around discouraging changing closed PEPs.

I'm fine with leaving old PEPs but updating PEP 1 and 12 to use the newer name.

@hugovk Would you like to amend this PR to do as @brettcannon suggests? Or close this one and create a new PR with just those changes?

Yep, will amend this one.

Updated!

Kept the changes in PEP 1 and 12, and update the generation scripts to handle PEP-Delegate in addition to BDFL-delegate.

Is pep2pyramid.py still needed or can it be deleted? It's not called by anything, has Python 2 prints, and references to it were removed from PEP 1 in #626.

Is pep2pyramid.py still needed or can it be deleted? It's not called by anything, has Python 2 prints, and references to it were removed from PEP 1 in #626.

I don't know, but lots of signs point to "no", given how long ago that file was touched last, the not only Python 2'isms in the file but

REQUIRES = {'python': '2.2',
            'docutils': '0.5'}

Maybe @brettcannon knows? OTOH, debugging-by-breaking is often a great technique :D -- maybe delete it and we can see if anything breaks?

I have no clue about whether pep2pyramid.py is still used. I'm with Barry and we can try deleting it in a separate PR for easy rollback.