Re: Statistics on non-free usage
On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 10:17:50AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 09, 2004 at 05:12:39PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > What package is that?
> >
> > ocaml-docs, ocaml-book-fr, ocaml-book-en, unicorn, unicorn-source. maybe
> > i missed some, but at least some of those where in this category.
>
> >From the raw popcon output:
Taken from the data you quoted :
> Package Vote Old Rcnt Unknown
> ocaml-book-en 0 0 0 19
ocaml-book-en non-free/doc 0 0 0 1 1
> ocaml-book-fr 0 0 0 10
ocaml-book-fr non-free/doc 0 0 0 0 0
> ocaml-doc 0 0 0 54
ocaml-doc non-free/doc 0 0 0 3 3
> unicorn 1 0 3 0
unicorn non-free/net 0 0 0 0 0
> unicorn-source 0 0 0 7
unicorn-source non-free/net 0 0 0 0 0
So, 3 out of 5 were indeed marked as not being used in the data you
presented as argument. This means that it seems that the data you
provided were false and not can not be used for this kind of discussion.
> The results do show that these packages are installed. In fact, from my
> own results, I showed that 3% of people had ocaml-doc installed. These
> figures support that.
Well, from your own mail.
> I'm not sure where you got that idea that popcon showed that nobody had
> installed these packages.
I hope it is clear now.
Friendly,
Svne Luther
Reply to: