homebrew's top 1000 requested installs

[Ken Cunningham]

It would certainly make sense to make sure we've covered off at least the top 100 with really good ports that are up to date and configured to really maximize the usage and potential of the machine.

For example, that openmpi version of ImageMagick we pondered probably should get pushed through and enabled, as that is about #10 on the list. Stuff like that.

Ken


On 2017-11-29, at 10:34 AM, Craig Treleaven wrote:

>> On Nov 29, 2017, at 11:42 AM, Ken Cunningham <ken.cunningham.webuse at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> in case anyone is curious what people are requesting.
>> MacPorts has almost all of these, I thought, glancing down the list.
>> 
>> https://brew.sh/analytics/install-on-request/
> 
> A bunch of random discussion at:
> 
> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15164439
> 
> Several people were vocally concerned about privacy…but clearly _many_ allow their stats to be collected.  Many of the concerns were that Homebrew was using Google for data analysis.  
> 
> Obligatory link to our similar-but-stalled initiative:
> 
> https://trac.macports.org/wiki/StatisticsIdeas
> 
> As I recall, privacy was a big stumbling block when we last discussed this.  I would argue that Homebrew’s experience shows that not that many people are actually concerned with anonymous data collection—especially if we don’t use Google for the analysis.  As a maintainer, I would *really* like to have even the roughest inkling of how many users there are of a particular port.  I obsoleted a couple of ports recently without the slightest idea how many systems they are currently installed on.
> 
> BTW, Homebrew doesn’t collect any information on the OS environment:
> 
> https://github.com/Homebrew/brew/blob/master/docs/Analytics.md
> 
> I’d like to understand at least which OS version my ports are being installed onto.  Again, that would help a lot with deciding how much effort to put into supported older systems.
> 
> I think it is fair to ask our users to provide anonymized stats so that we can make better decisions on the packaging work we do on their behalf.  
> 
> Craig