PEP 740: Mark as Final

[woodruffw]

This is my first time marking a PEP as final, apologies if I've missed a step! I've gone Provisional -> Final based on that being a documented valid transition in PEP 1.

Supporting points:

• PEP 740 roadmap on PyPI is complete: [Roadmap] Implement PEP 740 pypi/warehouse#15871
• PEP matches the final implementation
• Any substantial changes since the accepted version approved by the SC/PEP delegate
• Pull request title in appropriate format (PEP 123: Mark Final)
• Status changed to Final (and Python-Version is correct)
• Canonical docs/spec linked with a canonical-doc directive (or canonical-pypa-spec, for packaging PEPs)

CC @di @dstufft 🙂

---

📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://pep-previews--4114.org.readthedocs.build/

[AA-Turner]

Perhaps we could add a canonical link to the PEP 740 documentation in PyPI?

A

[JelleZijlstra]

Could also add a date (17-Jul-2024) to the Resolution header while you're here.

[woodruffw]

Done and done! The PyPI docs aren't a copy of the standard per se (they're user facing), so I'm not 100% certain they're right in that position. But FWICT other PEPs use canonical-doc in a similar manner.

[encukou]

Would it be possible to add the spec to https://www.pypa.io/en/latest/specifications/ ?
The PEP should keep motivation and design decisions, but keeping the current version of a specification in an immutable document is debt.

[woodruffw]

Would it be possible to add the spec to pypa.io/en/latest/specifications ?

Opened a PR for this: pypa/packaging.python.org#1646

(This is a funky spec addition, since it spans both PyPA and non-PyPA standardized aspects of packaging. But I've made an effort to carve those joints accurately 🙂)

[woodruffw]

NB: I've left both the spec and doc links in, since the spec is useful to implementors and the doc is useful to consumers. But I'm happy to remove the doc link if convention is to only link the PyPA spec.