[Markus Schnalke]
I know it is not possible to _know_ the real percentage of uses
which submit popcon stats of all users. But I want to ask for
guesses, because more oppinions do likely improve the result.
A while back, someone with access to the download logs for
security.debian.org tried to
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 09:21:45PM +0200, Nick Shaforostoff wrote:
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
--- Please fill out the fields below. ---
please package it, if the license is ok for you.
Package name: netlogo
Version:
On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 08:45:12 +0100
Kjeldgaard Morten m...@bioxray.au.dk wrote:
Thanks. Unless you setup some experimental method, any argument
should reduce
to handwaving or extension of various particular examples..
Surely, it must be possible to get an estimate of the number of
On Friday 16 January 2009 11:34:58 Guus Sliepen wrote:
The license of netlogo (which you should have filled in) is not
DFSG-compliant. So netlogo can only go into non-free. Also, according to
the netlogo website, the source code is not available. Do you really want
to package this?
not really
[2009-01-16 10:09] Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org
The whole thing is a complete unknown.
Of course you're right. But it's the best we have.
Instead of leaving it with ``we simply don't know'', I prefer to
estimate on the (unsure) data sources that are available.
For my case, I received
Le Friday 16 January 2009 11:51:50 markus schnalke, vous avez écrit :
[2009-01-16 10:09] Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org
The whole thing is a complete unknown.
Of course you're right. But it's the best we have.
Instead of leaving it with ``we simply don't know'', I prefer to
estimate on
[2009-01-16 12:06] Romain Beauxis to...@rastageeks.org
Le Friday 16 January 2009 11:51:50 markus schnalke, vous avez écrit :
[2009-01-16 10:09] Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org
The whole thing is a complete unknown.
Of course you're right. But it's the best we have.
Instead of
IMHO any bugs filed merely due to the presence of the code without the
means to trigger the error in normal builds should be wishlist.
What is particularlly insiduous about this issue is that it could
easilly be activated by accident if the maintainer or a NMUer builds and
uploads a new
Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org writes:
On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 08:45:12 +0100
Kjeldgaard Morten m...@bioxray.au.dk wrote:
Thanks. Unless you setup some experimental method, any argument
should reduce
to handwaving or extension of various particular examples..
Surely, it must be
Hi
Noah Slater wrote:
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 10:00:04PM +0100, markus schnalke wrote:
I know it is not possible to _know_ the real percentage of uses which
submit popcon stats of all users. But I want to ask for guesses,
because more oppinions do likely improve the result.
[..] is like
James Vega james...@debian.org writes:
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 4:55 PM, markus schnalke mei...@marmaro.de wrote:
[2009-01-15 22:37] Michael Goetze mgoe...@mgoetze.net
before wild speculations ensues, you might want to specify what you
really want to know: the percentage of people installing
On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 13:24:58 +0100
Simon Josefsson si...@josefsson.org wrote:
Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org writes:
Surely, it must be possible to get an estimate of the number of
downloads of important packages and security updates? I know these
downloads also are requested from
On Fri, Jan 02, 2009 at 05:28:24PM +0200, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
You're welcome to join pkg-voip-maintainers and coordinate with us about
this :)
I put my efforts so far online at
http://www.dorchain.net/~joerg/code/debian/ and would be pleased
to receive some critics.
Bye,
Joerg
On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 13:21:29 +
Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org wrote:
In that case, I'm probably responsible to thousands of 'installations'
OK, that's an exaggeration but it's certainly hundreds since Etch.
--
Neil Williams
=
http://www.data-freedom.org/
El Vie 16 Ene 2009, Simon Josefsson escribió:
How about numbers for security.debian.org downloads? That will measure
the number of well-administrated debian machines (except those
well-administrated machines that use other mirrors).
well-administrated *etch* machines.
luciano
--
To
* Luciano Bello [Fri, 16 Jan 2009 11:37:39 -0200]:
El Vie 16 Ene 2009, Simon Josefsson escribió:
How about numbers for security.debian.org downloads? That will measure
the number of well-administrated debian machines (except those
well-administrated machines that use other mirrors).
Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org writes:
On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 13:24:58 +0100
Simon Josefsson si...@josefsson.org wrote:
Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org writes:
Surely, it must be possible to get an estimate of the number of
downloads of important packages and security updates? I
On Friday 16 January 2009 15:42:38 Neil Williams wrote:
On Fri, 16 Jan 2009 13:21:29 +
Neil Williams codeh...@debian.org wrote:
In that case, I'm probably responsible to thousands of 'installations'
OK, that's an exaggeration but it's certainly hundreds since Etch.
This is true, but I
Hi,
On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 10:29:18AM +, peter green wrote:
IMHO any bugs filed merely due to the presence of the code without the
means to trigger the error in normal builds should be wishlist.
What is particularlly insiduous about this issue is that it could
easilly be activated by
Joerg Jaspert dijo [Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 08:08:28PM +0100]:
Umh... This might be the cause, then. Our mirror sync has died three
days in a row - At 16:37, 15:49 and 17:36 (GMT-6):
From where are you pulling?
syncproxy.wna.debian.org
Completly different machine, so not the cause for
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Simon Josefsson wrote:
Merely the number of distinct IP addresses downloading a particular
popular update from security.debian.org at least once would be
interesting.
Did you think about thousands of computers having 'private ips' with
some nat
Petter Reinholdtsen p...@hungry.com writes:
A while back, someone with access to the download logs for
security.debian.org tried to estimate the number of machines downloading
security fixes for Debian, based on the assumption that no-one is using
a mirror for security fixes. I am unable to
On 16/01/2009, at 11.09, Neil Williams wrote:
How do you map the number of downloads to the number of users or
machines? I have dozens of chroots that I use for multiple reasons.
Now, maybe I should use an apt proxy but most of these are
cross-building chroots so that doesn't help as the proxy
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Andreas Tille til...@rki.de
* Package name: r-cran-plotrix
Version : 2.5
Upstream Author : Jim Lemon, Ben Bolker, Sander Oom, Eduardo Klein, and others
* URL : http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/plotrix/
* License :
On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 11:18:14AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
It's worth bearing in mind that that's a bad assumption, too. We
use a local security mirror in full knowledge that it's not
recommended, but we watch it closely and will manually sync if
need be. We do this because we have systems
Johannes Wiedersich johan...@physik.blm.tu-muenchen.de writes:
Simon Josefsson wrote:
Merely the number of distinct IP addresses downloading a particular
popular update from security.debian.org at least once would be
interesting.
Did you think about thousands of computers having 'private
On 16/01/2009, at 23.25, The Fungi wrote:
Same here, though with a caching Debian package proxy instead of an
actual mirror. Nonetheless, s.d.o only sees one download of a given
security update even though it's actually being retrieved by
hundreds of machines.
On 16/01/2009, at 18.27,
In article 200901161206.13302.to...@rastageeks.org you wrote:
If the answer is we don't know, then we don't know. Problem is that you
don't give any ground to your claims, hence it is far worse to give any
estimation.
But if you say we see security donloads from x unique IPs for every new
In article 87d4enbfqd@mocca.josefsson.org you wrote:
It would establish an upper bound of well-administrated debian machines,
I think.
It is a lower bound, since I guess there are more cases where more than one
machine is updated. The case that you download without need or as a
duplicate
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 01:05:47AM +0100, Kjeldgaard Morten wrote:
Hundreds of machines accessing proxies, and thousands having
private IPs. Are these numbers something you know or are you just
throwing them around? Otherwise they can of course be accounted
for in the total estimate ;-)
I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 18:37:48 +0100
Source: sugar
Binary: sugar
Architecture: source all
Version: 0.82.9-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: high
Maintainer: Debian OLPC debian-olpc-de...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Changed-By: Jonas
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 21:00:40 +0300
Source: librcc
Binary: librcc-dev librcc0
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.2.7-3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Ivan Borzenkov ivan1...@list.ru
Changed-By: Ivan Borzenkov
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 19:25:05 +0100
Source: libpam-mount
Binary: libpam-mount
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 1.9-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Bastian Kleineidam cal...@debian.org
Changed-By: Bastian Kleineidam
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 22:18:45 +0100
Source: grub
Binary: grub grub-disk grub-doc grub-legacy-doc multiboot-doc
Architecture: source i386 all
Version: 0.97-47lenny2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: high
Maintainer: Grub Maintainers
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 11:30:41 -0500
Source: gdb
Binary: gdb gdb64 libgdb-dev
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 6.8.50.20090116.python-1
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Daniel Jacobowitz d...@debian.org
Changed-By:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 18:26:47 -0500
Source: fish
Binary: fish fish-dbg
Architecture: source i386
Version: 1.23.0-6
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: James Vega james...@debian.org
Changed-By: James Vega james...@debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 23:51:16 +0100
Source: kdenetwork
Binary: kdenetwork dcoprss kdenetwork-doc-html kdenetwork-kfile-plugins
kdenetwork-filesharing kdict kget knewsticker kopete kpf kppp krdc krfb ksirc
ktalkd kwifimanager librss1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 17:18:32 -0600
Source: libwww-mechanize-perl
Binary: libwww-mechanize-perl
Architecture: source all
Version: 1.54-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian Perl Group
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 23:56:59 +1100
Source: hplip
Binary: hplip hplip-data hplip-gui hplip-dbg hplip-doc hpijs-ppds hpijs
Architecture: source all i386
Version: 2.8.6.b-4
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian HPIJS and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 02:26:00 +0100
Source: mandos
Binary: mandos mandos-client
Architecture: source i386 all
Version: 1.0.5-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Mandos Maintainers man...@fukt.bsnet.se
Changed-By: Teddy
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 09:04:51 +0100
Source: pyicqt
Binary: pyicqt
Architecture: source all
Version: 0.8.1.1-1
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Michal Čihař ni...@debian.org
Changed-By: Michal Čihař ni...@debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 10:19:33 +0100
Source: quik-installer
Binary: quik-installer
Architecture: source powerpc
Version: 0.0.21lenny3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Aurelien Jarno aure...@debian.org
Changed-By: Aurelien
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 11:02:47 +0100
Source: gforge
Binary: gforge gforge-common gforge-web-apache2 gforge-web-apache
gforge-db-postgresql gforge-mta-exim4 gforge-mta-postfix gforge-mta-courier
gforge-shell-postgresql gforge-ftp-proftpd
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 11:06:00 +0100
Source: libcatalyst-manual-perl
Binary: libcatalyst-manual-perl
Architecture: source all
Version: 5.7016-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian Perl Group
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 11:28:17 +0100
Source: python-apt
Binary: python-apt python-apt-dbg
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.7.9~exp2
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: low
Maintainer: APT Development Team de...@lists.debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 12:28:20 +0100
Source: mathomatic
Binary: mathomatic mathomatic-primes
Architecture: source amd64
Version: 14.2.8-1
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Sandro Tosi mo...@debian.org
Changed-By: Sandro
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 14:16:49 +0100
Source: bzr-loom
Binary: bzr-loom
Architecture: source all
Version: 1.4.0~bzr91-1
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian Bazaar Maintainers pkg-bazaar-ma...@lists.alioth.debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2009 19:03:16 +0100
Source: gajim
Binary: gajim
Architecture: source i386
Version: 0.12.1-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Yann Leboulanger aste...@lagaule.org
Changed-By: Yann Leboulanger
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 23:20:04 +0100
Source: libset-object-perl
Binary: libset-object-perl
Architecture: source i386
Version: 1.27-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian Perl Group
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 12:48:52 +0100
Source: gammu
Binary: gammu gammu-smsd libgammu-dev libgammu-i18n libgammu6 libgsmsd6
libgammu-dbg python-gammu python-gammu-dbg python-gammu-doc
Architecture: source all amd64
Version: 1.22.91-1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 20:17:52 -0400
Source: libparse-cpan-meta-perl
Binary: libparse-cpan-meta-perl
Architecture: source all
Version: 0.04-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian Perl Group
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 11:54:56 -0400
Source: libextutils-command-perl
Binary: libextutils-command-perl
Architecture: source all
Version: 1.16-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian Perl Group
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 23:44:27 +0100
Source: libmail-imapclient-perl
Binary: libmail-imapclient-perl
Architecture: source all
Version: 3.13-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Debian Perl Group
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 10:27:22 -0600
Source: libgruff-ruby
Binary: libgruff-ruby libgruff-ruby-doc libgruff-ruby1.8
Architecture: source all
Version: 0.3.4-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Gunnar Wolf gw...@debian.org
libxine2-all-plugins
Architecture: source all amd64
Version: 1.1.90hg+20090116+01754b5a1b0e-1
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: low
Maintainer: li...@youmustbejoking.demon.co.uk
Changed-By: Darren Salt li...@youmustbejoking.demon.co.uk
Description:
libxine-dev - the xine video player library
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 19:01:59 +0100
Source: apache2
Binary: apache2.2-common apache2-mpm-worker apache2-mpm-prefork
apache2-mpm-event apache2-utils apache2-suexec apache2-suexec-custom apache2
apache2-doc apache2-prefork-dev
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 12:24:42 +0100
Source: python-shapely
Binary: python-shapely
Architecture: source all
Version: 1.0.11-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Pietro Battiston too...@email.it
Changed-By: Pietro Battiston
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.8
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2008 17:49:23 +0100
Source: rpm
Binary: rpm lsb-rpm librpm4.4 librpm-dev python-rpm
Architecture: source i386
Version: 4.4.2.3-2
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Anibal Monsalve Salazar
On Fri, 2009-01-16 at 02:35 -0200, Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw)
wrote:
Não vi isso na policy[1] e nem no New Maintainers Guide, existe outro
documento que aponte isso? Arrumei mesmo assim.
Debian Developer's Reference:
59 matches
Mail list logo
