On 10/17/06, Kam Leo <kam.leo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 10/17/06, Arthur Pemberton <pemboa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 10/17/06, Kam Leo <kam.leo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 10/14/06, Rahul Sundaram <sundaram@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Tim wrote: > > > > On Fri, 2006-10-13 at 21:32 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > > >> If you want to not even let the project collect anonymous hits you just > > > >> have to use a local mirror. > > > > > > > > And where would *that* get its files from? > > > > > > > > > > This is a pedantic argument. The central mirror list has certain > > > bandwidth requirements to be met before it is included. There are many > > > many mirrors out there which are public but dont meet the bandwidth > > > requirements and hence wont be included or counted as hits in our list. > > > Moreover if you dont use the central mirror list and instead pick one > > > specifically which is not the main mirror, you wont be counted by us. > > > > > > Lets suppose that you did pick from one of the mirrors included in our > > > list, you rsync and hit the mirror once and you can setup a local mirror > > > that distributes to any number of local systems without hitting the main > > > mirrors at all. > > > > > > Since I havent seen anyone express concerns over us collecting metrics > > > from anonymous hit logs that would be what we would be doing post FC6 > > > release. Maybe on FC7, we can have a opt in mechanism to collect more > > > stats. Having a better idea on how many users we have would be a good > > > thing and what we have been wanting to do for quite sometime. > > > > > > Rahul > > > > > > > > > > Is Red Hat requesting the number of users information because Fedora > > now uses yum and yum does not require/provide the single point of > > contact up2date provided? > > > > When last did Fedora _not_ use yum? > > -- > Fedora Core 5 and proud > If I recall correctly, FC1 used up2date as the default package updater. Could go back as far as FC3.
Didn't up2date use yum as the backend? -- Fedora Core 5 and proud
