Cheers folks I suggest that on the install of pacman, install scripts should be suggested the install of pkgstats to help more people using it. 1500 submits :) how much archers are there? (I had been thinking of this some time now lol) Anyway, I think a better way would be the mirrors making the statics of downloaded pkgs so it would be less intrusive and less risky. But that would require a lot work on mirrors and statics would be bias because it wouldn't know of pkg that are installed and uninstalled right away. pkgstats looks nice solution for the current state of the community (devs + AUR TUs + just users) I'm happy that someone made it come to work :) Another thing that would be nice to now about is if the packages are really used. I, like (I think) most of the users just install all packages in core and then what it misses even if doesn't use it no more in the future. In my case I try to keep few packages that I don't use in the arch partition because I don't have much space to waste but I don't think I wouldn't care much if I had a bigger partition for arch. Still I have some packages that I even forgot I have installed, for example, the ones that don't have a .desktop file. (The list of packages is too big to look at it) This is another problem but I just wanted to warn about a little bias that might exist in the numbers :) Greetings, raca Ter, 2008-11-11 às 00:44 -0200, Armando M. Baratti escreveu: > Charly Ghislain wrote: > > On Monday 10 November 2008 23:12:49 Hubert Grzeskowiak wrote: > >> a pacman which sends informations home - unasked?! are you serious? that > >> would be a data privacy horror! i don't want to have to observe pacman's > >> traffic the whole time fearing leaks. a feature/bug like that would > >> rather raise a huge scandal than appreciation. i have no doubt on this. > > > > Of course i dont want this to happen neither. Im just saying it would be the > > best population of result, 'statistically speaking'. > > > > As of pkgstat, yes it is heavily discussed, but i never installed it before i > > started reading this thread. > > > > Regards, > > > > Charly > > > I agree with the statistical issue. > > Statistics is a funny thing. Maybe about 1500 user isn't a very > significant part of the community. > > And as pointed by Charly, it could be a biased sample. > Not to mention the problems with using IP to determine the uniqueness of > the submissions (many machines under same IP, dinamic IPs). > > I'm not saying pkgstats is invalid. Only that the statistical results > from it must be taken with a grain of salt. > > > Armando
