On martes, 25 de febrero de 2020 19:06:27 (CET) Christoph Cullmann wrote: > On 2020-02-25 18:47, Nate Graham wrote: > > I find myself in agreement. > > > > I have access to the kuserfeedback data and to be honest I'm rather > > dissatisfied with its actionability. There's nothing detailed like "x > > percentage of users change the default wallpaper" or "y percentage of > > users switch to double-click" that we could actually use to inform our > > UI design--let alone anything that could be used to personally > > identify anyone. The actual data set is so tame and uninteresting that > > I agree that we could change our policy and release the stats just to > > show everyone that we have nothing to hide. > > +1 from me. (e.g. for the Kate stats)
+1 from Promo, even if it is only used to give us a vague idea of how the size of the userbase changes over time. Cheers Paul > > Greetings > Christoph > > > Nate > > > > On 2/25/20 5:44 AM, Veggero Nylo wrote: > >> Hi! > >> Currently, data transmitted by KUserFeedback is available only by > >> opening a sysadmin ticked explaining why you need access in the > >> first place. I can see the reasoning behind this, but I do not think > >> this is a good idea for developers and users. I think that releasing > >> the aggregated data under CC0 license would be better, as also > >> proposed by Martin here: > >> https://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-community/2017q3/003808.html. I > >> think this would benefit user trust, as right now they have to trust > >> what the KUserFeedback KCM without really being able to see what data > >> KDE developers are actually able to see (as most users won't be able > >> to look into the code); on the other hand, if the data was publicly > >> released, they would be able to see the data themselves and know > >> exactly what developers are going to see. I also think this would > >> benefit developers, as there might be a significant number of > >> developers who could be interested in looking to the data, maybe just > >> a single value, without being able to fully justify access to all the > >> data (the fact that you have to write a justification becomes a > >> negative factor that makes looking at the data less interesting); > >> furthermore, even if they get access to the data, they would be unable > >> to discuss it in KDE communication channels as those are public, nor > >> on phabricator tasks to support their patches, effectively making the > >> data much less useful. Also, the current policy might result in a > >> privacy problem, e.g.: I once needed data from stats.kde.org > >> <http://stats.kde.org> regarding website views over time. I was > >> granted access to it, and I now can see every singe website viewer, > >> with their country, OS, browser, etc - much more than I actually > >> needed. If the aggregated data was to be released publicly, I would no > >> longer need for stats.kde.org <http://stats.kde.org> access, and I > >> would no longer be able to access private data that I did not actually > >> need. Finally, I do not fully understand why the data needs to be kept > >> private in the first place, since it is supposed to be anonymous and > >> contain no user content. > >> What's your opinion on this? > >> ~ Niccolò Venerandi (aka veggero/niccolove) -- Promotion & Communication www: http://kde.org Mastodon: https://mastodon.technology/@kde Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/kde/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/kdecommunity LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/kde