Bradley Giesbrecht pixilla at
Tue Jun 11 07:53:22 PDT 2013

On Jun 11, 2013, at 6:46 AM, Jan Stary wrote:

> On May 28 21:36:58, jonesc at wrote:
>> Hi,
>> On 28 May 2013, at 08:12 PM, Jean-François Caron <jfcaron at> wrote:
>>> While download statistics might not be a good system, I do concur that MacPorts very much would benefit from having a "discovery" mechanism by which users find out about useful ports.  Searching is nice, but it's not discovery.  Some kind of "top ports" list (however implemented) would be useful, imho.
>> Personally, I fail to see how a 'top ports' list would tell me much. The ports i find essential are likely very different from others, so i don't see how using some sort of a list showing the most used ports would help me in any way in choosing new ones to install. Some ports likely have a low user base, but never less are critical to those that need them, such as more esoteric ports from the science section.
> +1
> let's say it turns out people download firefox a lot.
> then what?

Say we need/want to update a port that has many dependents; knowing the install base of the dependents could help us determine the support ramifications of different update approaches.

ie: moving apache2 install files to conform to porthier. Are 10 or 10,000 people likely to hit the MP mailing list asking what the bleep happened.

Bradley Giesbrecht (pixilla)

More information about the macports-users mailing list