PEP 775: Make zlib required to build Python

[StanFromIreland]

Basic requirements (all PEP Types)

• Read and followed PEP 1 & PEP 12
• File created from the latest PEP template
• PEP has next available number, & set in filename (pep-NNNN.rst), PR title (PEP 123: <Title of PEP>) and PEP header
• Title clearly, accurately and concisely describes the content in 79 characters or less
• Core dev/PEP editor listed as Author or Sponsor, and formally confirmed their approval
• Author, Status (Draft), Type and Created headers filled out correctly
• PEP-Delegate, Topic, Requires and Replaces headers completed if appropriate
• Required sections included
  • Abstract (first section)
  • Copyright (last section; exact wording from template required)
• Code is well-formatted (PEP 7/PEP 8) and is in code blocks, with the right lexer names if non-Python
• PEP builds with no warnings, pre-commit checks pass and content displays as intended in the rendered HTML
• Authors/sponsor added to .github/CODEOWNERS for the PEP

Standards Track requirements

• PEP topic discussed in a suitable venue with general agreement that a PEP is appropriate
• Python-Version set to valid (pre-beta) future Python version, if relevant
• Right before or after initial merging, PEP discussion thread created and linked to in Discussions-To and Post-History

---

📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://pep-previews--4281.org.readthedocs.build/pep-0775/

[hugovk]

GitHub Markdown tip: when adding an x, if you remove the space inside the square brackets, it'll render it as a checked checkbox. This:

* [ x] abc
* [x] def

Renders as:

• [ x] abc
• def

[AA-Turner]

Just for personal interest, is there a link to the discussion that preceeded creating this PEP? I hadn't realised there was going to be one for this change!

A

[encukou]

There is, https://discuss.python.org/t/23062 as linked in Post-History.
The SC could probably allow this change without a PEP, but it's a good way to summarize the discussion.

[StanFromIreland]

@hugovk any reason to change the title? (new) is a good clarification that it is not to do with an existing pep?

[hugovk]

This is our custom and what the template asks for:

• PEP has next available number, & set in filename (pep-NNNN.rst), PR title (PEP 123: <Title of PEP>) and PEP header

We have a new-pep A new draft PEP submitted for initial review label for new PEPs.

Running pep next with https://github.com/hugovk/pepotron won't pick up the custom title and will suggest 775 again.