Hi, Lucas Nussbaum (2026-02-12): > I added some statistics about fetishism^Hpristine-tar usage (SCNR) on > https://udd.debian.org/cgi-bin/dep14stats.cgi
Thanks! > 72.8% of packages with a working salsa project have a pristine-tar > branch. While the mere existence of a pristine-tar branch strongly suggests the packaging has at least used pristine-tar at some point in history, it does not necessary mean it *currently* uses pristine-tar. As a data point, this week I've converted a package to a pure-Git workflow, so it won't use the pristine-tar branch anymore. But I have no strong incentive to delete that branch on Salsa, so I plan to leave it alone, just in case someone may find it useful. I doubt this makes a big difference to the results right now. But *if* more and more packages migrate away from pristine-tar, I understand these stats simply won't reflect this evolution, and the numbers *might* get more and more misleading to readers who interpret these numbers as a gauge of current popularity. Does this make sense? If there's a good way to improve this at some point, it would be great. In the meantime, what about making the phrasing on the webpage reflect this reality better than the current "N packages […] use pristine-tar", so future readers of dep14stats.cgi are better equipped to interpret the data? For example: "use pristine-tar, or have used it in the past". Cheers, -- intrigeri
