Comment 4 for bug 163037

If you see that:

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bugs?field.searchtext=zim&orderby=-importance&search=Search&field.status%3Alist=NEW&field.status%3Alist=INCOMPLETE_WITH_RESPONSE&field.status%3Alist=CONFIRMED&field.status%3Alist=TRIAGED&field.status%3Alist=INPROGRESS&field.status%3Alist=FIXCOMMITTED&field.assignee=&field.bug_reporter=&field.omit_dupes=on&field.has_patch=&field.has_no_package=

then mean that I mean. It is stupid to report an error in zim when these are not met. A package that is in this state of neglect should not appear in the repository, it reduces user satisfaction and is useless because the application is not usable.

I think than Agafonov is right. Consider the occasions on which an application is uninstalled can be a good way to determine whether this is or is not satisfactory.

An application that is installed on a few occasions, but that users will not uninstall, may be unpopular, but satisfactory. When an aplicacións is uninstalled the 90% of the time that is installed is not satisfactory. It should consider the elimination of repositories in the event that its leaders do not face their work.

I think that popcon.ubuntu.com I believe that the data used in popcon.ubuntu.com to find out the popularity of an application are insufficient. Marks atime ctime and can be affected by other events in addition to the use of the application.

Uninstalling the application by almost all who have installed is more significant.