On Jun 11, 2013, at 6:46 AM, Jan Stary wrote: > On May 28 21:36:58, jon...@hep.phy.cam.ac.uk wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 28 May 2013, at 08:12 PM, Jean-François Caron <jfca...@phas.ubc.ca> wrote: >> >>> While download statistics might not be a good system, I do concur that >>> MacPorts very much would benefit from having a "discovery" mechanism by >>> which users find out about useful ports. Searching is nice, but it's not >>> discovery. Some kind of "top ports" list (however implemented) would be >>> useful, imho. >> >> Personally, I fail to see how a 'top ports' list would tell me much. The >> ports i find essential are likely very different from others, so i don't see >> how using some sort of a list showing the most used ports would help me in >> any way in choosing new ones to install. Some ports likely have a low user >> base, but never less are critical to those that need them, such as more >> esoteric ports from the science section. > > +1 > > let's say it turns out people download firefox a lot. > then what?
Say we need/want to update a port that has many dependents; knowing the install base of the dependents could help us determine the support ramifications of different update approaches. ie: moving apache2 install files to conform to porthier. Are 10 or 10,000 people likely to hit the MP mailing list asking what the bleep happened. Regards, Bradley Giesbrecht (pixilla) _______________________________________________ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
