Re: [Distutils] [Catalog-sig] Merge catalog-sig and distutils-sig
On 29 March 2013 14:45, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote: If we leave the main list the 'distutils-sig', and just announce that 'catalog-sig' is retired, folks who want to follow the new list just switch over. All the archives (mailman / gmane / etc.) stay valid, but the list goes into moderated mode. Whoever has the power to do this, do it please. Richard ___ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
Re: [Distutils] [Catalog-sig] Merge catalog-sig and distutils-sig
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 7:47 PM, Richard Jones rich...@python.org wrote: On 29 March 2013 14:45, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote: If we leave the main list the 'distutils-sig', and just announce that 'catalog-sig' is retired, folks who want to follow the new list just switch over. All the archives (mailman / gmane / etc.) stay valid, but the list goes into moderated mode. Whoever has the power to do this, do it please. +1 distutils-sig it is. We're expanding the charter to the distutils standard library module, the Python Package Index and associated interoperabilty standards, but that's a lot easier than forcing everyone to rewrite their mail filters. Besides, it's gonna be a *long* time before the default build system in the standard library is anything other than distutils. Coupling the build system to the language release cycle has proven to be a *bad idea*, because the addition of new platform support needs to happen in a more timely fashion than language releases. The incorporation of pip bootstrapping into 3.4 will also make it a lot easier to recommend more readily upgraded alternatives. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia ___ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
Re: [Distutils] [Catalog-sig] Merge catalog-sig and distutils-sig
On Mar 29, 2013, at 3:40 PM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 7:47 PM, Richard Jones rich...@python.org wrote: On 29 March 2013 14:45, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote: If we leave the main list the 'distutils-sig', and just announce that 'catalog-sig' is retired, folks who want to follow the new list just switch over. All the archives (mailman / gmane / etc.) stay valid, but the list goes into moderated mode. Whoever has the power to do this, do it please. +1 distutils-sig it is. We're expanding the charter to the distutils standard library module, the Python Package Index and associated interoperabilty standards, but that's a lot easier than forcing everyone to rewrite their mail filters. Besides, it's gonna be a *long* time before the default build system in the standard library is anything other than distutils. Coupling the build system to the language release cycle has proven to be a *bad idea*, because the addition of new platform support needs to happen in a more timely fashion than language releases. The incorporation of pip bootstrapping into 3.4 will also make it a lot easier to recommend more readily upgraded alternatives. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia ___ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig Sounds good to me, whoever please to doing the needful. - 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
Re: [Distutils] [Catalog-sig] Merge catalog-sig and distutils-sig
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? Not IMO. It seems to me that most of the same people are on both lists, and the topics almost always have consequences to both sides of the coin. So much so that it's often hard to pick *which* of the two (or both) lists you post too. Further confused by the fact that distutils is hopefully someday going to go away :) 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. +1 Jim -- Jim Fulton http://www.linkedin.com/in/jimfulton ___ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
Re: [Distutils] [Catalog-sig] Merge catalog-sig and distutils-sig
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 14:22 -0400, Donald Stufft wrote: Is there much point in keeping catalog-sig and distutils-sig separate? It seems to me that most of the same people are on both lists, and the topics almost always have consequences to both sides of the coin. So much so that it's often hard to pick *which* of the two (or both) lists you post too. Further confused by the fact that distutils is hopefully someday going to go away :) +1 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. - 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 ___ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
Re: [Distutils] [Catalog-sig] Merge catalog-sig and distutils-sig
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. -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr.fred at fdrake.net A storm broke loose in my mind. --Albert Einstein ___ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
Re: [Distutils] [Catalog-sig] Merge catalog-sig and distutils-sig
+1 ___ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
Re: [Distutils] [Catalog-sig] Merge catalog-sig and distutils-sig
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. ___ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
Re: [Distutils] [Catalog-sig] Merge catalog-sig and distutils-sig
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. - 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
Re: [Distutils] [Catalog-sig] Merge catalog-sig and distutils-sig
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 ___ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
Re: [Distutils] [Catalog-sig] Merge catalog-sig and distutils-sig
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Donald Stufft don...@stufft.io wrote: On Mar 28, 2013, at 3:39 PM, PJ Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote: 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. Worst case I'm sure subscribers can be transferred and the existing archive kept intact. That's a great way to have a bunch of people complaining that they never subscribed to packaging-sig, not to mention the part where it breaks everyone's mail filters. I really don't see any gains for renaming the list. It's not like we can go and scrub the entire internet of references to distutils-sig. ___ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
Re: [Distutils] [Catalog-sig] Merge catalog-sig and distutils-sig
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
Re: [Distutils] [Catalog-sig] Merge catalog-sig and distutils-sig
As a mostly-lurker on both who would love to cut down on the number of lists I have to follow: a hearty +1! Jacob On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Donald Stufft don...@stufft.io wrote: Is there much point in keeping catalog-sig and distutils-sig separate? It seems to me that most of the same people are on both lists, and the topics almost always have consequences to both sides of the coin. So much so that it's often hard to pick *which* of the two (or both) lists you post too. Further confused by the fact that distutils is hopefully someday going to go away :) 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. - 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 ___ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
Re: [Distutils] [Catalog-sig] Merge catalog-sig and distutils-sig
I think I'm the only one on the list who probably would have objected but I'm on both now so whatever :-) Richard On 29 March 2013 07:32, PJ Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote: On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Donald Stufft don...@stufft.io wrote: On Mar 28, 2013, at 3:39 PM, PJ Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote: 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. Worst case I'm sure subscribers can be transferred and the existing archive kept intact. That's a great way to have a bunch of people complaining that they never subscribed to packaging-sig, not to mention the part where it breaks everyone's mail filters. I really don't see any gains for renaming the list. It's not like we can go and scrub the entire internet of references to distutils-sig. ___ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig ___ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
Re: [Distutils] [Catalog-sig] Merge catalog-sig and distutils-sig
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 03/28/2013 04:32 PM, PJ Eby wrote: On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Donald Stufft don...@stufft.io wrote: On Mar 28, 2013, at 3:39 PM, PJ Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote: 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. Worst case I'm sure subscribers can be transferred and the existing archive kept intact. That's a great way to have a bunch of people complaining that they never subscribed to packaging-sig, not to mention the part where it breaks everyone's mail filters. I really don't see any gains for renaming the list. It's not like we can go and scrub the entire internet of references to distutils-sig. Not to mention breaking the gmane.org gateway, and those of us who sip the firehose there instead of trying to swallow it via e-mail. Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tsea...@palladion.com Palladion Software Excellence by Designhttp://palladion.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlFUuS4ACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ4zXACguC0D2F3EEE7GT4DGXRa08hy7 FdYAoM56YpHef9J0ScKOdY2OHv/48LOv =3UtH -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
Re: [Distutils] [Catalog-sig] Merge catalog-sig and distutils-sig
On Mar 28, 2013, at 5:42 PM, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote: Signed PGP part On 03/28/2013 04:32 PM, PJ Eby wrote: On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Donald Stufft don...@stufft.io wrote: On Mar 28, 2013, at 3:39 PM, PJ Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote: 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. Worst case I'm sure subscribers can be transferred and the existing archive kept intact. That's a great way to have a bunch of people complaining that they never subscribed to packaging-sig, not to mention the part where it breaks everyone's mail filters. I really don't see any gains for renaming the list. It's not like we can go and scrub the entire internet of references to distutils-sig. Not to mention breaking the gmane.org gateway, and those of us who sip the firehose there instead of trying to swallow it via e-mail. Tres. - -- === Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tsea...@palladion.com Palladion Software Excellence by Designhttp://palladion.com ___ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig This problem is inherent no matter what name is picked. GMane will need updated and some messages will need sent to tell people about the new name. No matter what at least one name isn't going to be used anymore. It's not that big of a deal. - 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
Re: [Distutils] [Catalog-sig] Merge catalog-sig and distutils-sig
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 5:15 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss ja...@jacobian.org wrote: C'mon, folks, we're arguing about a name. That's about as close to literal bikeshedding as we could get. I'm not arguing about the *name*. I just don't see the point in making everybody subscribe to a new list and change their mail filters (and update every book and webpage out there that mentions the distutils-sig), because a few people want to *change* the name -- a change that AFAICT doesn't actually provide any tangible benefit to anybody whatsoever. How about we just let whoever has the keys make the change in whatever way's easiest and most logical for them? Because it's not up to just the person with the keys. Neither SIG is a mere mailing list, it's a Python special interest group, and SIGs have their own formation and termination processes. In particular, if you're going to start a new SIG, one of the requirements to be met is in particular, no other SIG nor the general Python newsgroup is already more suitable (per the Python SIG Creation Guidelines). It's hard to argue that distutils-sig isn't already more suitable than whatever is being proposed to take its place. ___ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
Re: [Distutils] [Catalog-sig] Merge catalog-sig and distutils-sig
On Mar 28, 2013, at 7:28 PM, PJ Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote: On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 5:15 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss ja...@jacobian.org wrote: C'mon, folks, we're arguing about a name. That's about as close to literal bikeshedding as we could get. I'm not arguing about the *name*. I just don't see the point in making everybody subscribe to a new list and change their mail filters (and update every book and webpage out there that mentions the distutils-sig), because a few people want to *change* the name -- a change that AFAICT doesn't actually provide any tangible benefit to anybody whatsoever. How about we just let whoever has the keys make the change in whatever way's easiest and most logical for them? Because it's not up to just the person with the keys. Neither SIG is a mere mailing list, it's a Python special interest group, and SIGs have their own formation and termination processes. In particular, if you're going to start a new SIG, one of the requirements to be met is in particular, no other SIG nor the general Python newsgroup is already more suitable (per the Python SIG Creation Guidelines). It's hard to argue that distutils-sig isn't already more suitable than whatever is being proposed to take its place. A requirement for a SIG is also that it has a clear goal and a start and end date. distutils-sig's goal is the distutils module. And the end date requirements seems to be completely ignored anymore so arguing strict adherence to the rules seems to be a wash. I suggested packaging-sig because discussion jumps back and forth between distutils-sig and catalog-sig and neither name nor stated goal really reflected what the sig was actually about which was packaging in python in general. I also suggested packaging because it matched the other current sigs which are generic topics and not about a single module. But whatever, I hate the pointless duplication and just want to kill the overlap. - 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
Re: [Distutils] [Catalog-sig] Merge catalog-sig and distutils-sig
But whatever, I hate the pointless duplication and just want to kill the overlap. Agree, +1 to merging into one list. On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Donald Stufft don...@stufft.io wrote: On Mar 28, 2013, at 7:28 PM, PJ Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote: On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 5:15 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss ja...@jacobian.org wrote: C'mon, folks, we're arguing about a name. That's about as close to literal bikeshedding as we could get. I'm not arguing about the *name*. I just don't see the point in making everybody subscribe to a new list and change their mail filters (and update every book and webpage out there that mentions the distutils-sig), because a few people want to *change* the name -- a change that AFAICT doesn't actually provide any tangible benefit to anybody whatsoever. How about we just let whoever has the keys make the change in whatever way's easiest and most logical for them? Because it's not up to just the person with the keys. Neither SIG is a mere mailing list, it's a Python special interest group, and SIGs have their own formation and termination processes. In particular, if you're going to start a new SIG, one of the requirements to be met is in particular, no other SIG nor the general Python newsgroup is already more suitable (per the Python SIG Creation Guidelines). It's hard to argue that distutils-sig isn't already more suitable than whatever is being proposed to take its place. A requirement for a SIG is also that it has a clear goal and a start and end date. distutils-sig's goal is the distutils module. And the end date requirements seems to be completely ignored anymore so arguing strict adherence to the rules seems to be a wash. I suggested packaging-sig because discussion jumps back and forth between distutils-sig and catalog-sig and neither name nor stated goal really reflected what the sig was actually about which was packaging in python in general. I also suggested packaging because it matched the other current sigs which are generic topics and not about a single module. But whatever, I hate the pointless duplication and just want to kill the overlap. - Donald Stufft PGP: 0x6E3CBCE93372DCFA // 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 DCFA ___ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig ___ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
Re: [Distutils] [Catalog-sig] Merge catalog-sig and distutils-sig
On Mar 28, 2013, at 03:42 PM, Donald Stufft wrote: 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. Renaming can be done, but it's a bit of a pain. Of course, we can keep the archives for any retired list, so urls don't need to break. OTOH, it's definitely easier just to keep distutils-sig and retire catalog-sig. -Barry signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
