Re: Useless packages (was Re: anarchism_7.7-1.deb)
On Sat, Sep 25, 1999 at 07:28:57AM +0000, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> David Starner <dvdeug@x8b4e53cd.dhcp.okstate.edu>:
> > Instead of each developer chose what packages are and aren't useful
> > to them, why don't we look at the popularity contest? A simple, bias-free
> > way of seperating programs on to the CD's, by actual use. That is what
> > it was made for.
>
> http://www.debian.org/~apenwarr/popcon/ says
>
> *** THIS IS EXPERIMENTAL!! *** Try not to get upset if the
> results are incorrect, but be sure to e-mail me if you think
> there's something funny going on.
>
> I wouldn't base decisions on it yet.
Is there any reason to think it's not correct? More importantly, even if it is
somewhat wrong, is there any reason to think it's not better than what we have?
Assuming it works, popcon takes into account dependencies (because if a depends
on b, then at least as many people have b installed as have a installed.) If
there are any standard packages that popcon wouldn't put on the first CD, I
would question whether they really should be standard.
The biggest problem with popcon is that it gives more weight to a program
in Slink than to a program new with Potato (assuming there are a significant
amount of people running popcon on straight Slink systems.)
David Starner - dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org
Reply to: