Updates to PEP-0752 including co-authoring of the PEP

The PEP-0752 is important for community driven projects - such as
Apache Airflow, not only because of security risks but also because
of concerns with public discussions about new names of distributions
following agreed and implemented pattern.

As agreed with Ofek, I am happy to become co-author of the PEP and
added more motivation explaining this case.

Author: potiuk

peps/pep-0752.rst

@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
 PEP: 752
 Title: Implicit namespaces for package repositories
-Author: Ofek Lev <ofekmeister@gmail.com>
+Author: Ofek Lev <ofekmeister@gmail.com>,
+        Jarek Potiuk <potiuk@apache.org>
 Sponsor: Barry Warsaw <barry@python.org>
 PEP-Delegate: Dustin Ingram <di@python.org>
 Discussions-To: https://discuss.python.org/t/63192
@@ -39,6 +40,9 @@ namespace. A few examples:
   are prefixed by ``opentelemetry-`` with child prefixes in the form
   ``opentelemetry-<component>-<name>-``. The contrib packages live in a
   central repository and they are the only ones with the ability to publish.
+* `Apache Airflow <https://airflow.apache.org>`__ is a platform to programmatically
+  author, schedule and monitor workflows. It has a `providers`__ where each
+  provider package is prefixed by ``apache-airflow-providers-``.
 
 __ https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-python
 __ https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-python-contrib
@@ -93,6 +97,16 @@ similar characters but that is insufficient for these use cases.
 
 __ https://github.com/pypi/warehouse/blob/8615326918a180eb2652753743eac8e74f96a90b/warehouse/migrations/versions/d18d443f89f0_ultranormalize_name_function.py#L29-L42
 
+Another problem that namespacing would solve is the issue of choosing new names
+for packages following the agreed patterns of naming. Often (this is the case
+for ``Apache Airflow`` for example), there are public discussions that precede
+the decision to create a new package. The decision is based on the agreed
+name and follow the pattern of the existing packages. If more package names are
+considered during the discussion, all the names have to be reserved via ``PyPI``
+interface before the discussion is public, otherwise the names can be taken by
+other users. This is a problem that actually happened in the past as explained
+in the associated discussion.
+
 Rationale
 =========