On Mar 28, 2013, at 4:04 PM, holger krekel <hol...@merlinux.eu> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 15:42 -0400, Donald Stufft wrote: >> On Mar 28, 2013, at 3:39 PM, PJ Eby <p...@telecommunity.com> wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Fred Drake <f...@fdrake.net> wrote: >>>> On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Donald Stufft <don...@stufft.io> wrote: >>>>> Is there much point in keeping catalog-sig and distutils-sig separate? >>>> >>>> No. >>>> >>>> The last time this was brought up, there were objections, but I don't >>>> remember what they were. I'll let people who think there's a point >>>> worry about that. >>>> >>>>> Not sure if there's some official process for requesting it or not, but >>>>> I think we should merge the two lists and just make packaging-sig to >>>>> umbrella the entire packaging topics. >>>> >>>> There is the meta-sig, but the description is out-dated: >>>> >>>> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/meta-sig >>>> >>>> and the last message in the archives is dated 2011, and sparked no >>>> discussion: >>>> >>>> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/meta-sig/2011-June.txt >>>> >>>> +1 on merging the lists. >>> >>> Can we do it by just dropping catalog-sig and keeping distutils-sig? >>> I'm afraid we might lose some important distutils-sig population if >>> the process involves renaming the list, resubscribing, etc. I also >>> *really* don't want to invalidate archive links to the distutils-sig >>> archive. >>> >>> All in all, +1 on not having two lists, but I'm really worried about >>> "breaking" distutils-sig. We're still going to be talking about >>> "distribution utilities", after all. >> >> Don't care how it's done. I don't know Mailman enough to know what is >> possible or how easy things are. I thought packaging-sig sounded nice but if >> you can't rename + redirect or merge or something in mailman I'm down for >> whatever. > > I've moved lists even from external sites to python.org and renamed them > (latest was pytest-dev). That part works nicely and people can continue > to use the old ML address. Merging two lists however makes it harder > to get redirects for the old archives. But why not just keep distutils-sig > and catalog-sig archives, but have all their mail arrive at > a new packaging-sig and begin a new archive for the latter? > > holger > > >> ----------------- >> Donald Stufft >> PGP: 0x6E3CBCE93372DCFA // 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 DCFA >> > > > >> _______________________________________________ >> Catalog-SIG mailing list >> catalog-...@python.org >> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig > sounds good to me. ----------------- Donald Stufft PGP: 0x6E3CBCE93372DCFA // 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 DCFA
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
