Files for daily downloads are exposed at https://clojars.org/stats/. Format of {[group-id artifact-id] {version number-of-downloads}}. IIRC this was a temporary end point until there is a real api, but I don't believe there are any plans to remove them.
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 6:30 PM, Colin Fleming <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes, you're definitely right that measuring Cursive use is not a good > proxy for the community as a whole since that also reflects the state of > Cursive itself. > > The download metric would be interesting if we could compare, say, the > last 3-4 months - I don't know if Clojars stores timestamps with its > downloads or just increments a counter. > > On 24 April 2015 at 23:00, David Nolen <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Colin Fleming < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Google trends begs to differ: >>> https://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=clojure%2C%20clojurescript&cmpt=q&tz= >>> >> >> I think extrapolating from Google trends is probably not that useful for >> measuring usage. >> >> >>> I was surprised by this because there seems to be a similar level of >>> traffic on the two mailing lists and ClojureScript has had a lot of great >>> work done on it recently, and I had put it down to the fact that Cursive >>> didn't have a very good CLJS REPL story. Perhaps that wasn't the reason >>> after all. >>> >> >> I know that personally there was really little incentive for me to write >> ClojureScript applications with Cursive until even a couple of weeks ago >> without a sensible REPL. But Cursive is still really not that pleasant with >> ClojureScript, as there are a *very* large number of distracting analysis >> gaps wrt. ClojureScript idioms. This would be enough for many people to >> stick with an Emacs/Vim workflow. >> >> I think a better metric is probably measuring downloads of something on >> Clojars that's going to be on many dependency graphs. >> >> https://clojars.org/cljsjs/react/versions/0.12.2-5 vs. >> https://clojars.org/ring/versions/1.3.2 >> >> That said, I think the surveys are likely biased towards production >> Clojure users where ClojureScript is probably a more useful element of the >> stack. For example, I would be surprised if that 50% applied to hobbyists >> or anyone who doesn't have the requisite JavaScript knowledge to be >> productive. >> >> David >> >> >> -- >> Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with >> your first post. >> --- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "ClojureScript" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript. >> > > -- > Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with > your first post. > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "ClojureScript" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript. > -- Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ClojureScript" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.
