Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, May 06, 2007 at 10:15:40PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: >> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> > On Sat, May 05, 2007 at 06:23:36PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: > >> >> [Michael Hanke] >> >> > To me it looks like stats for the major architectures up to (and >> >> > including) powerpc are ok wrt privacy concerns. Do you agree? > >> >> I'm not sure if that would be the correct cutoff point, or if only >> >> amd64 and i386 have enough submissions to ignore the privacy issue. > >> > Well, at that point what use is a per-arch stat anyway? > >> So porters can see what package are most usefull for that >> architecture. > > Ok, WTF. How have four different people missed the point here that *being > able to get per-arch per-package statistics only for i386 and amd64 does not > give meaningful per-arch information*?
If you have i386, amd64, ppc and others that would still be somewhat usefull. The others would be important to keep. Otherwise I totaly agree with you. I expect i386 and amd64 to be nearly identical to each other and the total. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]