Hi there, Resurrecting an old thread, as I just thought about this today. On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 01:19:52PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: > [Paul Wise] wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > The derivatives guidelines[1] mention popcon[2] and suggest submitting > > to both popcon.debian.org and popcon.example.org. > > > > Can the popcon devs (CCed) please comment on this suggestion, is it > > appropriate to do that? > > I would recommend this only for distros mostly using Debian packages. So I'm thinking about Ubuntu specifically. Would you recommend it here? I guess by "Debian packages" you mean ones that are unmodified? There are some graphs https://merges.ubuntu.com/universe-now.png and https://merges.ubuntu.com/main-now.png which show that Ubuntu does 'mostly' use (unmodified) Debian packages. I can see the value in separating out the origin though (but would still like the aggregate displayed by default on popcon.d.o — I'm interested not just in what my packages are doing in Debian, but across all derivatives). Would this be hard to do? Would you consider this a blocker to including Ubuntu popcon data — since otherwise it would massively outweigh all other contributions and be inseparable? Cheers, Iain
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature