I don't think this is true. There are fairly strong voices on both sides inside the community, at this time it's pretty uncertain.

To quote Guido:

>Let’s not blow it this time. If we’re going forward with nogil (and I’m not saying we are, but I can’t exclude it), let’s make sure there is a way to be able to import extensions requiring the GIL in a nogil interpreter without any additional shenanigans

https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-703-making-the-global-inter...

The Steering Council said their intention is to remove the GIL-build in future:

> Long-term, we want no-GIL to be the default, and to remove any vestiges of the GIL (without unnecessarily breaking backward compatibility). We don’t want to wait too long with this, because having two common build modes may be a heavy burden on the community (as, for example, it can double test resources and debugging scenarios), but we can’t rush it either. We think it may take as much as five years to get to this stage.

https://discuss.python.org/t/a-steering-council-notice-about...

By the usual laws of software estimates, if they think it will take 5 years, it's going to be more like 10-15.