On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 7:25 AM, yersinia <yersinia.spiros@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Look interesting from a QA point of view. How exactly is this interesting from a QA pov in Fedora? Smolt profiles I can understand being useful for QA because it gives us some ability to look for commonalities when troubleshooting hardware problems. I'm really not sure what installed packaging information gives up in terms of helping any QA process. Care to explain your thoughts on this? Debian uses popcon for a specific reason...to help in ordering the packages on their install media sets. I'm not sure we are interested in that sort of help...Debian releases are a vastly different timescale than ours. We aren't going to adapt the media contents based on popcon every 6 months.. I don't see us making a commitment to use the data in the same way Debian uses it..so I'm left scratching my head on how we will use it at all. Before I would be personally willing to commit time on seeing this implemented I would need to know what the perceived value is. I love datamining...but I'm not a big fan of collecting data without first having a stated reason for the collection of that information. If we are going to collect it I expect it to be used and I expect the initial use to be stated before we start collecting it. And more generally speaking. I'm not keen on collecting information unless there is a potential direct benefit for users who are providing the information. So the reason for collection needs to be sufficiently...user-focused...and not just because we want metrics. Collecting the information has to be used primarily to help us provide a better user experience or I'm going to get really pissy about it. Fair warning. -jef -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel