Package Statistics V2 Results

dolby · 2010-09-29 07:41:22

The new package statistics are pretty neat, especially the Fun ones.
I got a question to ask. In the package usage statistics we now see:

Installed packages per repository
core 98.88 %
extra 83.94 %
community 66.63 %
multilib 87.83 %

Does that mean that 1/3 of the packages in community arent installed by anyone of the ~2200 users (individual IP's) who have submitted stats so far, or am i reading this the wrong way?

Allan · 2010-09-29 07:57:36

I believe that is what it means.

dolby · 2010-09-29 08:04:59

Thanks Allan.
BTW its very interesting that MC tops every graphical file manager out there.

karol · 2010-09-29 12:32:28

dolby wrote:

Thanks Allan.
BTW its very interesting that MC tops every graphical file manager out there.

Allan breaks X so often that you need a manager that can work in the console ;P

dolby · 2010-09-29 12:52:58

karol wrote:

Allan breaks X so often that you need a manager that can work in the console ;P

Lies, Allan doesnt have anything to do with X.

Allan · 2010-09-29 12:59:09

Nah - I deal with things like the C library that will take down your whole system.

karol · 2010-09-29 13:04:24

Allan wrote:

Nah - I deal with things like the C library that will take down your whole system.

Thanks for reminding me to C if the library is already open after the summer break.

What will happen to those packages with no or few users?

Allan · 2010-09-29 13:06:56

Maybe nothing... maybe dropped to the AUR. It depends on who (if anyone) is maintaining them.

.:B:. · 2010-09-29 13:07:37

I think a TU can pick up a package to put in [community] after it gets a minimum of votes in the AUR, but I don't know how it works if TUs decide to drop stuff to AUR .

karol · 2010-09-29 13:16:38

.:B:. wrote:

I think a TU can pick up a package to put in [community] after it gets a minimum of votes in the AUR, but I don't know how it works if TUs decide to drop stuff to AUR .

If we were to drop packages _from_ [community] that wouldn't make too much sense: community -> AUR -> community ;P
I don't believe a package would gain a huge following just because it has been dropped to AUR, so I think it's safe to do that and allow maintainers of official repos to focus their efforts on keeping the packages up to date and bug-free. Setting a threshold, how many users does a package need to have in order to keep it in [community] isn't necessary: as Allan said, if someone wants to maintain it, let him keep it.

zebulon · 2010-09-30 10:47:44

I agree with karol. I don't think that we should use these statistics to start to arbitrarily remove packages because nobody use them. Firtsly, the statistics only concern 2200 users. Removing packages may upset users who did not or could not report for some reasons. Secondly, what makes the interest of a distribution is the choice and potential, and Arch has a lot of them. It is moreimportant to make sure that the packages are up-to-date and bug-free.

flamelab · 2010-09-30 10:49:11

Question: opera doesn't show in fun statistics in the browsers due to fact that it is in AUR and not in extra/community ?

Last edited by flamelab (2010-09-30 10:49:22)

Allan · 2010-09-30 10:52:34

zebulon wrote:

It is moreimportant to make sure that the packages are up-to-date and bug-free.

Keeping packages up-to-date and bug-free takes time. There is a large number of packages for the number of developers, so if packages are not widely used and we do not have an active maintainer for them, it is better that they are in the AUR.

Of course the more the community helps out (e.g. on the bug tracker), the more time developers have to maintain more packages... I have not seen anyone new from the community put a decent effort into helping out on the bug tracker in quite some time.

zebulon · 2010-09-30 11:17:19

I am prepared to help, as much as free time allows me. I shall see how to request maintaining packages that are orphans in community.

Allan · 2010-09-30 11:19:36

The way to maintain packages in [community] is either become a Trusted User or have them dropped to the AUR...

zebulon · 2010-09-30 11:24:26

Is it difficult become a TU? I have maintained RPM specs before for other distributions. For Arch I have been active with the documentation though. Do I need to maintain on AUR first ?

pyther · 2010-09-30 12:36:31

zebulon wrote:

Is it difficult become a TU? I have maintained RPM specs before for other distributions. For Arch I have been active with the documentation though. Do I need to maintain on AUR first ?

Some info: http://aur.archlinux.org/trusted-user/TUbylaws.html

zebulon · 2010-09-30 16:17:23

Thanks.

dolby · 2010-10-03 06:17:51

dolby wrote:

I got a question to ask. In the package usage statistics we now see:
Installed packages per repository
core 98.88 %
extra 83.94 %
community 66.63 %
multilib 87.83 %
Does that mean that 1/3 of the packages in community arent installed by anyone of the ~2200 users (individual IP's) who have submitted stats so far, or am i reading this the wrong way?

I think thats wrong cause now with ~3000 individual users having sent stats the community % has dropped to ~59%.

Also now that "awesome" is back at unsupported maybe it could be replaced by dwm.

Last edited by dolby (2010-10-03 06:29:36)

lymphatik · 2010-10-03 07:52:47

Lowest number of installed packages      1

How is that even possible ?

Last edited by lymphatik (2010-10-03 07:53:00)

karol · 2010-10-03 10:05:28

dolby wrote:

Also now that "awesome" is back at unsupported maybe it could be replaced by dwm.

dwm has been in [community] for quite some time.

dolby · 2010-10-03 11:01:43

karol wrote:

dolby wrote:
Also now that "awesome" is back at unsupported maybe it could be replaced by dwm.
dwm has been in [community] for quite some time.

I obviously meant in the statistics. They're not supposed to include packages from unsupported.

karol · 2010-10-03 11:14:16

dolby wrote:

karol wrote:
dolby wrote:
Also now that "awesome" is back at unsupported maybe it could be replaced by dwm.
dwm has been in [community] for quite some time.
I obviously meant in the statistics. They're not supposed to include packages from unsupported.

dwm _is_ in the stats, just not in the fun ones.

Arch Linux

#1 2010-09-29 07:41:22

Package Statistics V2 Results

#2 2010-09-29 07:57:36

Re: Package Statistics V2 Results

#3 2010-09-29 08:04:59

Re: Package Statistics V2 Results

#4 2010-09-29 12:32:28

Re: Package Statistics V2 Results

#5 2010-09-29 12:52:58

Re: Package Statistics V2 Results

#6 2010-09-29 12:59:09

Re: Package Statistics V2 Results

#7 2010-09-29 13:04:24

Re: Package Statistics V2 Results

#8 2010-09-29 13:06:56

Re: Package Statistics V2 Results

#9 2010-09-29 13:07:37

Re: Package Statistics V2 Results

#10 2010-09-29 13:16:38

Re: Package Statistics V2 Results

#11 2010-09-30 10:47:44

Re: Package Statistics V2 Results

#12 2010-09-30 10:49:11

Re: Package Statistics V2 Results

#13 2010-09-30 10:52:34

Re: Package Statistics V2 Results

#14 2010-09-30 11:17:19

Re: Package Statistics V2 Results

#15 2010-09-30 11:19:36

Re: Package Statistics V2 Results

#16 2010-09-30 11:24:26

Re: Package Statistics V2 Results

#17 2010-09-30 12:36:31

Re: Package Statistics V2 Results

#18 2010-09-30 16:17:23

Re: Package Statistics V2 Results

#19 2010-10-03 06:17:51

Re: Package Statistics V2 Results

#20 2010-10-03 07:52:47

Re: Package Statistics V2 Results

#21 2010-10-03 10:05:28

Re: Package Statistics V2 Results

#22 2010-10-03 11:01:43

Re: Package Statistics V2 Results

#23 2010-10-03 11:14:16

Re: Package Statistics V2 Results

Board footer