> 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-...@python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig > >
_______________________________________________ Catalog-SIG mailing list Catalog-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/catalog-sig
