Hello, and thanks for your contribution!

I'm a bot set up to make sure that the project can legally accept this contribution by verifying everyone involved has signed the PSF contributor agreement (CLA).

CLA Missing

Our records indicate the following people have not signed the CLA:

@Tinche

For legal reasons we need all the people listed to sign the CLA before we can look at your contribution. Please follow the steps outlined in the CPython devguide to rectify this issue.

If you have recently signed the CLA, please wait at least one business day
before our records are updated.

You can check yourself to see if the CLA has been received.

Thanks again for the contribution, we look forward to reviewing it!

I've signed the CLA FWIW, guess it takes a while to process.

You should link bpo-46771 in the PR title and description.

That issue is rather long. Was this change discussed specifically? It makes it harder to instantiate this object with keyword arguments, because the attr names are underscored.

@asvetlov I don't think this is the best way to collaborate on this.

Instead of your main PR being python->python, and my PRs being asvetlov->python, can your PR be asvetlov->python, and my PRs be asvetlov->asvetlov? That just makes more sense to me.

@JelleZijlstra these arguments are essentially all internal, the end users will use wrappers in the module. And for broader context, I am trying to collaborate with Andrew on a different PR, so this was meant for Andrew first.

an your PR be asvetlov->python, and my PRs be asvetlov->asvetlov?

Now the PR is set up exactly to this. Base branch selects where the PR lands.

I don't like dataclass usage here:

1. All other asyncio classes don't use dataclasses
2. The dataclass usage is not completely hidden, dataclass.replace(), dataclass.fields(), dataclass.asdict() are implicitly supported. Do you really want to provide this?
3. If we decide to provide C Extension in the future, dropping dataclass support can break backward compatibility potentially.

Ok, noted.