On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 7:49 PM, <orion@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Is that telling us something? I think you have to look at the unique IP mirror manager stats as well to get an idea of whether the smolt opt-in stats are valid as a metric for overall adoption. Do those stats support the same conclusion you are trying to draw from the smolt data? Can you reconcile what they are saying? I wish we had the maps up, they are snapshot of the MirrorManager logs from the last week, so they give a different picture versus the total unique ip count since release. The sampling statistics for smolt's voluntary opt-in mechanism are not necessarily statistically valid to extrapolate from a population sampling theory point of view, since smolt users may be an unrepresentative sample of the wider userbase. Are certain types of users more likely to use smolt than others? We've no statistically valid survey of active workloads or usage scenarios. Are people less interested in optting into smolt now than they were a year ago? We've no idea. Is smolt usage itself trending downward with each release? And likewise with the mirror manager unique ips. That is clearly going to be missing some people who reconfigure their systems to use a static mirror. Do we have any idea how many people do that? No. Do we know if people are less interested now in using MirrorManager than a year ago? No idea. Is MirrorManager usage itself trending downward with each release? It's also interesting to look at this from the global map point of view as a distribution of Fedora installs globally, instead of trying to get a single number. I think trending the global distribution of clients matters more in terms of figuring out where to concentrate new community building efforts. Let me be very clear... no one in this project has stepped up and made the case for an adoption increase goal for each release. If you are looking for a measurable uptick in adoption then you need to step up and lead a user adoption effort. Looking at the metrics for total adoption goal numbers and parsing out small relative percentage changes in adoption from release to release when we've no organized effort to drive those numbers up is absolutely pointless. Until the goal of driving user counts up with each release becomes personally important to someone, someone who will lead an effort, it will not be important. Let me be even clearer. I personally do not care about seeing adoption driven significantly higher for its own sake with each release. I believe in the concept of the "right" users for sustainable growth, I do not need to see user numbers driven upward just for the sake of pointing to it patting ourselves on the back. I only care about sustainable growth, where users become contributors and help sustain new efforts. Which is why I care about the map densities as a tool to see where in the world new community effort can be incubated. -jef -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
