Re: Stating the size of ecosystems in descriptions

[swedebugia]

On 2019-01-16 19:55, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
> Pierre Neidhardt <address@hidden> writes:
> 
>> Ricardo Wurmus <address@hidden> writes:
>>> I’d prefer not to add a feature like this.
>>
>> Why not?
> 
> Lots of reasons.
> 
> One reason is that pypi isn’t the only source of Python packages.  Nor
> is CRAN the only source of R packages.  There are also package sources
> that we fetch from other locations because of problems with whatever has
> been published on the more popular repositories (e.g. most of the
> rubygems).
> 
> I also think it’s not the job of a package manager to tell you how much
> software there is in this world and how much of it can be accessed via
> the package manager.  What good are those numbers?  What useful
> information do they provide?  I don’t think it’s good to clutter the
> list of commands (and the documentation) with features of very limited
> usefulness.
> 
> I don’t like the ways it would work: neither do I want to store and
> regularly update lists of remote packages nor do I want to have my
> package manager call out to remote web servers.  What about packages
> that are not available because they are not free software?
> 
> (Finally, I don’t like the use of the word “ecosystem” in the realm of
> software.)

OK. Thanks for stating this Ricardo. Pierre, I'm fine with removing the
sentence with the number altogether.

-- 
Cheers 
Swedebugia