From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 11 10:26:40 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80DD9316 for ; Tue, 11 Dec 2012 10:26:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rsk@gsp.org) Received: from taos.firemountain.net (taos.firemountain.net [207.114.3.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DC668FC16 for ; Tue, 11 Dec 2012 10:26:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gsp.org (bltmd-207.114.17.210.dsl.charm.net [207.114.17.210]) by taos.firemountain.net (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id qBBAQTdC022177 for ; Tue, 11 Dec 2012 05:26:31 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 05:26:24 -0500 From: Rich Kulawiec To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: The FreeBSD Project is enabling Google Analytics on www.freebsd.org Message-ID: <20121211102624.GA17131@gsp.org> References: <20121210093841.GP69108@e-new.0x20.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 10:26:40 -0000 On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 02:35:16PM -0900, Royce Williams wrote: > I'm no conspiracy theorist, and GA's reports are excellent, but if > there is some way for the FreeBSD project to get 80% of the > functionality without sending the data to a third party, I'd be in > favor of that. I concur with your point and the sentiment behind it, but until we know precisely *what* functionality is in question here, it's not clear whether 80% or 20% or 95% of it is actually necessary. The FreeBSD web developers should clearly articulate what problems they believe to be in play, why they believe them to be problems, and how they plan to characterize and quantify them. At this point, I see no evidence on table that indicates why the raw web logs can't be used directly. (That is NOT a statement that such evidence doesn't exist: it might. In fact, I presume it does because I presume that the web developers would use them if they would suffice. But it's a statement that this evidence and the accompanying reasoning have not yet been placed in front of all of us for consideration.) ---rsk