[Catalog-sig] Merge catalog-sig and distutils-sig

[PJ Eby]

On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Fred Drake <fred at fdrake.net> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Donald Stufft <donald at 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.