Hi,
On 2012-03-23, at 12:03 , Kay Schenk wrote: > > > On 03/21/2012 07:23 PM, Rob Weir wrote: >> I'd like to enable Google Analytics on our download page. >> >> This would allow us to collect some important data, such as the >> geographical distribution of download requests. This information has >> been sought for 3.4 mirror distribution planning. It can also provide >> continuity of our download statistics which we would otherwise lose >> when moving off of MirrorBrain. >> >> Of course, if some else is willing to implement an alternative way of >> collecting this info, then I'd love it hear it. But I think GA is the >> most direct method. >> >> Lazy consensus, 72 hours, etc. >> >> -Rob > This sounds fine with me. Yes, we should state our privacy policy on use, and > at some point, if you do produce a public report, maybe nix IP addresses if > that's a concern. I think nixing IP addresses is a necessity, if one were to publish this data, as is informing the downloader of the privacy issues. FWIW, we used to use several means to track downloads of the binaries. None was particularly great and none satisfied the desires of corporate marketing. And all made some in the corporate hierarchy uncomfortable, if only because a download of a binary is hardly the same as a contribution to source. We used Google Analytics but also, as was then called, Omniture. Selected data were published in graphical form to the services wiki. In addition, more or less from the start, I published spreadsheets of downloads, and particularized it according to language but not region. (I also listed OS of version downloaded.) There were many problems to these spreadsheets, as I noted at http://stats.openoffice.org/, not least of which was spurious duplication and misleading numeration. What I always desired was a mechanism by which a successful download could "call home", thus supplying rather useful information. In the end, a version of just this was indeed done, via update calls, extensions, etc. However, there was no direct insertion of such a mechanism. If we were ever to do that, I would argue that we do need then to inform any would-be downloader of the privacy issues. -louis PS Roberto asked me about the old data and if it a) was extant and b) reflected geolocation. Answers: It was not extant, and I didn't keep the raw data. (I could probably find it stuffed into some archive, but why? As I pointed out to Roberto, the ODF Alliance information regarding ODF uptake is actually a better indicator, as most ODF implementations they track were or are based on OOo.)
