[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: should etch be Debian 4.0 ?

Paul TBBle Hampson wrote:

On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 12:21:51AM +0200, Martin Dickopp wrote:
Josh Lauricha <laurichj@bioinfo.ucr.edu> writes:

On Fri 07/08/05 21:06, Luis Matos wrote:
For sarge:
Mean: 138189... Its those damned 200504201-style numbers.

Number of packages with a version number greater than or equal to 1000
(likely to be derived from a date?):

Better make that 10000, otherwise we unfairly exclude anthy:
testing (utils): A Japanese input method (backend, dictionary and utility) 6300d-2: alpha amd64 arm hppa i386 ia64 m68k mips mipsel powerpc s390 sparc
(And 6700 has gone into unstable, and is awaiting autobuilders, I expect)

90% quantile version number:

  > grep-aptavail -P '' -s Version \
    | sed 's/^[^0-9]*\([0-9]\+:\)\?\([0-9]\+\(\.[0-9]\+\)\?\).*$/\2/' \
    | sort -n \
    | head -$(expr 9 \* $(grep-aptavail -P '' -s Version | wc -l) / 10 + 1) \
    | tail -1

This is the only output that looks like a reasonable value. The question
is, has it been growing monotonically across releases, and will it continue
to do so? ^_^

Can anyone compare with oldstable?

(The advantage of the tex-like approaching-pi version is that people will
stop using it, and start referring to things by name, like they should. ^_^)

Reply to: