[Popcon-developers] popcon & derivatives

[Bill Allombert]

On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 12:48:52PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 4:46 AM, Bill Allombert wrote:
> 
> > Could you check the git branch bill-VENDOR I have made for that feature ?
> > Ideally one some derivative distribution.
> 
> Some thoughts on vendor stuff in general:
> 
> I would suggest that the default should be to report an empty VENDOR:
> in popcon submissions when the vendor is not defined. 

Hello Paul,

In which scenario the vendor field is not defined ?

> The server side
> should store vendors as they are submitted, not map them to Debian for
> storage. 

I think it only assumes that report for pre 1.57 popcon are from Debian.

> I don't understand the server side well, but the statistics
> and output files should be calculated based on reports with a vendor
> field that is empty or with a vendor field that is the same as the
> dpkg vendor of the popcon server. This would make it easier for
> derivatives to setup their own popcon servers.

The server script are too much Debian specific already to make a difference, I
am afraid.

> Your branch is missing the change I made to
> examples/bin/popcon-stat.pl, I think it would be useful for popcon.d.o
> to keep track of which derivatives are popular.

I discarded it because it did not do anything. Do you expect it will become
worthwhile to add a graph of vendor fields stats to popcon.debian.org main page
? At this point it is clearly premature.

> I think this change could be mentioned in the package changelog and
> the NEWS.Debian file.

It is mentionned in the changelog and the FAQ.

> The package description still mentions Debian, reattached the patch for that.

Yes this is correct. According to the data you provided, all derivatives that
are not Ubuntu-based report to Debian. Thus your patch makes an incorrect
statement that popcon submit to the distro while it actually submits to Debian.

Cheers,
-- 
Bill. <ballombe at debian.org>

Imagine a large red swirl here.