On 2011-Jan-12, Peter Hercek wrote:
On 01/10/2011 03:45 PM, Peter Simons wrote:
To get the discussion started, I'd like to offer a concrete question that you might want to think about: is it realistic to try and support *all* of Hackage?
I do no think this makes sense. My guess would be that most hackages packages are not used by any archlinux user. We should support all of HP and the most used packages. We should find the most used ones based some voting (publishing a way how archlinux users can ask for including a package to habs). Maybe we can just find them based on number of downloads from aur (if such a number if available).
I agree. In addition, some of the packages will not build, some are incompatible with others, some have been abandoned by their authors (including at least three that I've abandoned myself, but have been too lazy to look up the method of requesting that they be hidden in the Hackage listing). As an alternative to counting downloads from AUR (which, of course, will not count the downloads of packages that have not yet been made available on AUR), maybe it would be possible to revive Don Stewart's count of Hackage downloads, http://www.galois.com/~dons/hackage/hackage-downloads.csv For a while I believe it was being updated quarterly, but the last time seems to have been June 2010. Greg
_______________________________________________ arch-haskell mailing list arch-haskell@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/arch-haskell
-- ___ ___ __ _ / _ \ / _ \| | | | Gregory D. Weber, Associate Professor / /_\// / | | | /\ | | Indiana University East / /_\\/ /__| | |/ \| | http://mypage.iu.edu/~gdweber/ \____/\_____/\___/\__/ Tel. (765) 973-8420; FAX (765) 973-8550