Anatoly, please stop reopening the issue, it's *really* annoying. Not
only you failed to understand correctly your problem (it looks like
nor Christian nor Marc-Andre nor me understood your request), but it
looks like you don't care of our answers.

> PEP repository readme lacks information about how to send Python Enhancement Proposal step-by-step.

Did you at least read the *first* PEP, the PEP which describes the PEP process?
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0001/

Did you also read the developer guide? The PEP process is also explained there:
http://docs.python.org/devguide/langchanges.html#pep-process

> What I propose it to make PEP repository self-sufficient,

The PEP 1, 9 and 12 are already included in the PEP repository.

I don't understand why you are focused on the README.rst file. PEPs
are more convinient because automatically exported online at:
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/

For example, you must read:
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0001/

> I am already keep opening it, damn. I want to contribute an improvement for the PEP process and not forget about it. That's why I fill in into tracker, and not into email.

The PEP process is already well described, so your issue is invalid.

You don't propose anything concrete. Example of concrete thing: a
patch on the pep-0001.rst or on README.rst. Or contribute to the
devguide.

Did you sign the contributor agreement?
http://docs.python.org/devguide/coredev.html#sign-a-contributor-agreement

I know that you don't want to sign it, even if I don't understand why
(please don't start discuss it here, the legal mailing list is the
right place), but it's required to contribute to CPython.

--

The PEP process is not so formal. Just start discussing an idea on
python-idea, don't worry of the exact structure of a PEP document. It
can be written later. It is a waste of time to write a full PEP if an
idea is quickly rejected.