[aur-general] Package voting alternatives
sebnow at gmail.com
Mon Dec 28 03:09:36 EST 2009
On 27/12/2009, at 3:35 PM, kludge wrote:
> On 12/26/2009 10:00 PM, Sebastian Nowicki wrote:
>> I believe this was discussed on aur-dev some years ago, but it seems
>> that discussion was lost (no longer in archives). I'd like to bring
>> the subject again. What do you think the best way to indicate package
>> popularity is? The two main ideas were votes (the current
>> implementation) and a download counter. I can't really recall which
>> was preferred.
>> The issue has been raised because we're deciding which to use in
>> as a patch has been submitted to implement votes.
>> I'd like to know if voting works, how effective it is, and how much
>> significance it has on a TU's decision to put a package into
>> Basically whether it's "broken" and needs to be "fixed" or if it's
>> the way it is.
>> P.S. I didn't send this to aur-dev as it doesn't really concern the
>> developers. It's an end-user feature, and mostly a feature for TUs,
>> so I
>> posted here.
> that is (or at least has been) a much thornier question than i think
> think it is.
> search through this list's archives around starting around november of
> 2008. this might be a good starting point:
> some choice reading there!
Thanks for the link, but that discussion seems to have a different
focus. I'm not concerned with policy about the metric, I'm just
looking for a more optimal solution for an indication of the usage of
a package. I don't expect to be able to provide an accurate
indication, just a more accurate one than through a primitive voting
system. There are some valid points in there though.
On 27/12/2009, at 12:28 PM, Alexander Lam wrote:
> Although I know that personally, I forget to vote often, there is a
> with counting downloads:
> I try out a lot of packages and if they don't fit my needs, I don't
> want my
> vote/download counted.
> On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 11:00 PM, Sebastian Nowicki
> <sebnow at gmail.com>wrote:
On 27/12/2009, at 3:37 PM, Jeff Horelick wrote:
> My problem with voting is that stuff like...Say i use one of the
> firefox-like packages in the AUR (swiftfox, swiftweasel, firefox-
> beta, what
> have you) and I vote for it, but then I switch to Chrome/Chromium.
> unlikely that i'll ever remember to un-vote when i switch which
> would skew
> the popularity/vote rating for the firefox package.
These are some of the reasons I have been thinking of a time-scaled
voting/download hybrid. Votes would be tracked as they have been, and
a download counter would be introduced. However these two statistics
would be affected by time in some sort of a mathematical function
which would result in a "popularity" statistic. I believe there are
many such functions around used for sites like Digg and Reddit. Old
votes/downloads would be less significant, so issues such as switching
software (firefox -> chromium for example) wouldn't be as severe.
The reason for introducing a download counter is because it would
indicate how many users _continue_ to use a package. You can vote only
once, and possibly forget about the vote (and hence not un-vote), but
if you upgrade, this gets tracked and affects the "popularity"
If a package is extremely popular at one point, but then becomes
obsolete by a "next generation" package, the popularity of the
obsolete package will decrease over time, although the votes and
downloads would increase slightly, if at all.
There are two major issues I have with a download counter though. One
being spamming, which would only be easily avoided by banning certain
IPs for an amount of time (however requiring IP tracking, which is a
privacy issue). The other is having to "proxy" the download through a
script to actually track the download. This shouldn't really be a
problem if done right, but it can be a point of failure and adds
More information about the aur-general