On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 05:39:51PM -0400, seth vidal wrote: > On Tue, 2008-05-27 at 22:25 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 03:53:18PM -0400, seth vidal wrote: > > > Hi, > > > I got this bug assigned to yum the other day: > > > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=446836 > > > > > > it's not really a yum item, yet, b/c yum can really only USE the data, > > > not generate it. > > > > > > However, I don't know where it should go. Is anyone working on this sort > > > of thing? > > > > Isn't any package popularity rating going to be hugely skewed such that > > the 'default install set' packages are basically always rated top, making > > rankings of dubious value > > that's been my general impression which is why I was curious who wanted > to look at it since my overt bias against them is a bit discouraging :) I think a more useful metric would be a popularity list based on which programs are *run*. You'd obviously have to exclude things that are typically batch-run/scripted - eg bash would dominate. Count any binary run with a .desktop file perhaps, although that'd exclude mutt and emacs. IIRC mugshot/gnome live is already able to track this kind of metric Dan. -- |: Red Hat, Engineering, Boston -o- http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org -o- http://ovirt.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: GnuPG: 7D3B9505 -o- F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :| -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
