The original docs request was for a rationale for using bdist_msi
instead of bdist_wininst, but you're right there should be something at
least a little specification-y. And we probably want to keep it pretty
short, so maybe something like::

  .. class: distutils.command.build_bdist_msi.bdist_msi(Command)

     Builds a `Microsoft Installer`_ (.msi) binary package.

     .. _Microsoft Installer:
     http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc185688(VS.85).aspx

     In most cases, the bdist_msi installer is a better choice than the 
     bdist_wininst installer, because it provides better support for 
     Win64 platforms, allows administrators to perform non-interactive
     installations, and allows installation through group policies.

I'm on the fence as to whether or not to include the URL to the MSI
info. That's probably as close to a specification as we can get, but
it's probably unnecessary for 99% of the people who might read the
bdist_msi docs.