Re: alternatives and priorities
On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 04:55:52PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst <wouter@debian.org> writes:
> > If you have a look at the order of the by_vote numbers for editors,
> > you'll see that vim, not nvi or nano, is at the top.
>
> A list like this only seems meaningful if the entries are fairly
> consistent with each other.
>
> For instance, if you have packages like:
>
> PACKAGE NAME USE COUNT
> -----------------------------------------
> EDITOR-1 123
> EDITOR-2-VERSION-3 55
> EDITOR-2-VERSION-3.1 49
> EDITOR-2-VERSION-4 73
>
> The package "EDITOR-1" is "more popular" than any other _package_, but
> one could also fairly say that EDITOR-2 is actually more popular than
> EDITOR-1 in general. Which should be higher priority?
Good point.
I would say that all three should receive approximately the priority of
all three editors combined, but with version 4 slightly more than
version 3, and version 3 in turn slightly more than version 3.1
How's that sound?
--
Fun will now commence
-- Seven Of Nine, "Ashes to Ashes", stardate 53679.4
Reply to: