[Beldin]

I'm not sure what they want to count. It definitely isn't users, as they ignore multiple users per system. It seems to be something like "currently active and online machines". But then you should not ignore machines that will not be updated. Maybe they mean "machines that follow the weekly update schedule this week"?

That seems to be what Poeterring's approach counts.

[tflink]

Disclaimer: I work for Red Hat on Fedora. Take that for what you will

As far as I know, the desire is to get better numbers on how much the parts of Fedora are being used. There is always more work to do than there are folks to do all of it; having better numbers on how much different bits are being used helps us make better decisions on what to focus on.

Granted, I'm not Matt but I've heard him talk about similar things and have run into the issue myself - "Is anyone even using this? Is it worth putting this level of effort into this particular thing?"

EDIT: Phrasing of the last sentence

[JohnFen]

But Fedora should remain wary of an over-reliance on telemetry. It's very, very easy to draw the wrong conclusions about things, leading to decisions that reduce the quality of the product.

As an example, there are very likely to be packages that aren't often needed, but are absolutely critical when they are.