On Thu Sep 22 2016 14:50:43 GMT-0600 (MDT) Matthew Miller
wrote:
> We probably _can_ -- the data is there. Just need to find a way to
> show it that brings out that answer. Maybe instead of counting number
> of reports, count number of packages with reports each day and
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 16:50:43 -0400,
Matthew Miller wrote:
We probably _can_ -- the data is there. Just need to find a way to
show it that brings out that answer. Maybe instead of counting number
of reports, count number of packages with reports each day and
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 01:29:38PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> I honestly don't really know either. Can we tell if it's some small set
> of specific crashes that's really occurring a lot, or is there no
> pattern like that and it's more like just...more things are crashing
> more often?
We
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Adam Williamson
wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-09-22 at 16:09 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
>> tl;dr: are we getting buggier, or are more people using the crash
>> reporting?
>>
>> I made this chart:
>>
>>
On Thu, 2016-09-22 at 16:09 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> tl;dr: are we getting buggier, or are more people using the crash
> reporting?
>
> I made this chart:
>
> https://mattdm.fedorapeople.org/misc/faf-vs-mirrors-fedora-7dma.png
>
> It takes the number of retraces per day from FAF* and
tl;dr: are we getting buggier, or are more people using the crash
reporting?
I made this chart:
https://mattdm.fedorapeople.org/misc/faf-vs-mirrors-fedora-7dma.png
It takes the number of retraces per day from FAF* and normalizes them
using the mirror connection data I have from Smooge — this