[jdom-interest] Downloads.....

Sun Dec 16 07:01:02 PST 2012

Hi All.

In concept, I agree with you, but, honestly, the 500 is better than 5 
argument is exactly what interests me. I am looking at relative usage.

Also, 'sonatype' (the maven gateway I use) now has the statistics page 
up and running.

For example, here's the usage graph for JDOM 1.1 from maven (you can see 
that JDOM 1.1 usage is actually trending *up* ... :( I don't understand 
that, honestly. ):

http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?cht=lc&chs=800x200&chco=326A9E&chxt=x,y&chtt=Downloads+Over+the+Last+12+Months+For+org.jdom:jdom:1.1&chxr=1,0,37487&chds=0,37487&chxs=1N*s*&chls=3&chm=o,0066FF,0,-1,10,0&chd=t:26900,27976,27960,33207,31134,32157,31650,33266,32598,30451,37487,35979&chxl=0:|Dec2011|Jan2012|Feb2012|Mar2012|Apr2012|May2012|Jun2012|Jul2012|Aug2012|Sep2012|Oct2012|Nov2012

Here's the graph for all jdom2 artifacts:

http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?cht=lc&chs=800x200&chco=326A9E&chxt=x,y&chtt=Downloads+Over+the+Last+12+Months+For+org.jdom:jdom2&chxr=1,0,1387&chds=0,1387&chxs=1N*s*&chls=3&chm=o,0066FF,0,-1,10,0&chd=t:0,0,0,27,54,94,125,183,136,388,899,1387&chxl=0:|Dec2011|Jan2012|Feb2012|Mar2012|Apr2012|May2012|Jun2012|Jul2012|Aug2012|Sep2012|Oct2012|Nov2012

What's interesting is seeing that maven users have not been finding the 
jdom2 artifacts:

Here's the graph for 2.0.2 which is the last version posted to the jdom 
artifact before I was convinced I had to move jdom 2.x versions to the 
new jdom2 artifact....

http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?cht=lc&chs=800x200&chco=326A9E&chxt=x,y&chtt=Downloads+Over+the+Last+12+Months+For+org.jdom:jdom:2.0.2&chxr=1,0,2141&chds=0,2141&chxs=1N*s*&chls=3&chm=o,0066FF,0,-1,10,0&chd=t:0,0,0,0,0,0,949,1872,2141,2077,1979,1954&chxl=0:|Dec2011|Jan2012|Feb2012|Mar2012|Apr2012|May2012|Jun2012|Jul2012|Aug2012|Sep2012|Oct2012|Nov2012

Now, compare that with the previous version 2.0.1 ... see what happened 
when 2.0.2 was released?

http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?cht=lc&chs=800x200&chco=326A9E&chxt=x,y&chtt=Downloads+Over+the+Last+12+Months+For+org.jdom:jdom:2.0.1&chxr=1,0,1368&chds=0,1368&chxs=1N*s*&chls=3&chm=o,0066FF,0,-1,10,0&chd=t:0,0,0,0,35,1232,1368,676,532,392,346,392&chxl=0:|Dec2011|Jan2012|Feb2012|Mar2012|Apr2012|May2012|Jun2012|Jul2012|Aug2012|Sep2012|Oct2012|Nov2012

You would expect something similar from 2.0.2 when 2.0.3 was released 
...? But you can see that the 'tail off' is simply not there in 2.0.3... 
basically people are not looking at artifact jdom2 the same as they look 
at jdom.

Anyway, download statistics do add some value, whether is is just trend 
information, or for 'warm and fuzzies'.

Also, maven-central keeps relatively convenient statistics... which is 
possibly the best thing about maven ... ;)

Rolf

On 14/12/2012 3:27 AM, Michael Kay wrote:
> I came to the conclusion a while ago that download statistics were
> almost useless. They're inflated by people doing automatic and repeated
> downloads from their build scripts, and deflated by people getting
> copies that have been staged somewhere else. About the only thing you
> can say is that a project getting 500 downloads a day is more popular
> than one getting 5.
>
> Michael Kay
> Saxonica
>
> On 14/12/2012 01:22, Rolf Lear wrote:
>> Hi Jason, All.
>>
>> Technically the official download is from jdom.org, and the github is
>> just a copy, but the jdom.org download page actually points to the
>> github copy of the page if you click the link (or you still have the
>> option of navigating on to the jdom.org download area which will *not*
>> download from github, but from jdom.org).
>>
>> I like being able to see how many downloads are being done, and I can
>> tell from the github pages that there's about 250 downloads a day (at
>> 4MB each that's 1GB a day, which I suppose is quite a lot, really, for
>> one project using a free service... hmmm. We should set up a torrent
>> for it.... ;-).
>>
>> I don't know how many downloads happen from the 'horse's mouth'
>> www.jdom.org location.
>>
>> It would be great if we could get statistics on the combined download
>> activity for the various releases.... makes for entertainment and some
>> satisfaction (hey, it's nice to know that people use JDOM, through
>> ways other than just bug reports.... ;-).
>>
>> Adding this to the jdom.org site may be relatively complicated because
>> you would have to trawl the web logs, keep a bookmark to avouid
>> double- counts, etc. More effort than it seems is worth it.
>>
>> For what it's worth I can also follow the maven-central statistics.
>> For there the downloads are more interesting to track because it shows
>> a lot of inertia on the 1.1 release of JDOM... of course, now the
>> maven site (oss.sonatype.org) is misbehaving, but about 35-40K
>> downloads a month, of which 80% or so are for JDOM 1.1, about 10% are
>> for 1.1.1 through 1.1.3, and about 10% was for JDOM 2.x releases....
>> that's based on memory the last time I actually checked was about the
>> 8th of december, and it only updates once a month, for the previous
>> month, about 1 week in to the next... i.e. I check the maven-central
>> downloads once a month sometime after the 7th of the month.
>>
>> You can see why jdom 1.1 is still so popular in maven when you see:
>> http://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.jdom/jdom/1.1
>>
>> compare it with:
>> http://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.jdom/jdom/1.1.3
>>
>> Also, compare it with:
>> http://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.jdom/jdom2/2.0.3
>>
>> The mvnrepository site has not yet included the 2.0.4 version (lazy
>> people ... ;-)
>>
>> Bottom line is that when maven projects use things like saxon, they
>> pull the slow and more buggy 1.1 code instead of 1.1.3.
>>
>> This is another reason why I don't like Maven... 30K people a month
>> are downloading code from 2007 that: does not synchronize on the
>> Namespace class; can't handle surrogate double-char characters; two
>> dozen other bug fixes; and thinks attributes with no namespace prefix
>> are in the *default* namespace, not the 'no namespace'.... and there
>> is no way to stop this madness....
>>
>> Rolf
>>
>>
>> On 13/12/2012 7:23 PM, Jason Hunter wrote:
>>> Probably we need to move back to jdom.org <http://jdom.org>.  What
>>> activity metrics were you watching?  Maybe we can just add those on
>>> jdom.org <http://jdom.org>.
>>>
>>> -jh-
>>>
>>> On Dec 13, 2012, at 8:58 AM, Rolf Lear wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Github has suddenly stopped supporting downloads of binart files.
>>>> Check the github blog:
>>>>
>>>> https:github.com/blog
>>>>
>>>> It appears that they are grandfathering existing files... but we won't
>>>> be adding any new downloads later...
>>>>
>>>> Any suggestions?
>>>>
>>>> One obvious option is to use the base jdom.org <http://jdom.org> site,
>>>> but it is harder to measure activity from there...
>>>>
>>>> Rolf
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> To control your jdom-interest membership:
>>>> http://www.jdom.org/mailman/options/jdom-interest/youraddr@yourhost.com
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> To control your jdom-interest membership:
>> http://www.jdom.org/mailman/options/jdom-interest/youraddr@yourhost.com
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> To control your jdom-interest membership:
> http://www.jdom.org/mailman/options/jdom-interest/youraddr@yourhost.com
>