[aur-general] Package voting alternatives

Sebastian Nowicki sebnow at gmail.com
Mon Dec 28 04:54:14 EST 2009

On 28/12/2009, at 5:40 PM, Ray Rashif wrote:

> 2009/12/28 Philipp Überbacher <hollunder at lavabit.com>:
>> For package A there might be two releases per year, for package B 15.
>> For package C there might be only one update per upstream release,  
>> for
>> package D there might be 5.
> The math will take care of that :)

In all seriousness, it would to an extent. Votes could be made more  
significant than downloads, and downloads could be time-scaled more  
severely than votes, etc. The downloads of a frequently updated  
package as opposed to an infrequently updated package can be  
normalized. It is a very good point though. The question is, would  
this system be more accurate than plain votes, and would it be worth  
implementing it?

There will never ever be a flawless algorithm, we just need one that's  
the most suitable. Perhaps I'm over-complicating things and a voting  
system is enough. After all TUs make the final decision about which  
packages get into community.

More information about the aur-general mailing list