Re: Statistics logging of auto update http queries

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andreas Pflug [mailto:pgadmin@pse-consulting.de]
> Sent: 03 December 2004 12:44
> To: Dave Page; pgadmin-hackers
> Subject: RFC: Statistics logging of auto update http queries
>
> When pgAdmin is checking for new available updates, I'd like
> to transfer some statistical data as well, so we can get some
> kind of information about our users. To have this clean
> regarding privacy, we should discuss how to do this. Here are
> my ideas:
>
> - Feature should be enabled by default

OK.

> - Before the first update check is performed, the user must
> be informed about what's going to happen, pointing to the
> help item describing the post format and the possibility to
> disable it.

OK. Perhaps every 6 or 12 checks assuming they are normally monthly, to
make sure the user doesn't forget?

> - The docs must state clearly what data is transmitted, how
> it's collected, what we do with it (and what we promise never
> to do), and point to the sources handling that data for
> reviewing purposes.

Yes. A full privacy policy is essential.

> Data transmitted:
> - pgadmin version in use
> - language in use
> - update interval (to calculate a weight)
> - number of registered servers
> - major version of servers that have been used with pgadmin
> (collected in the registry)
>
> Collected: as above, plus country taken from requesting ip address.

OK.

> Explicitely not to collect: ip address.

The webserver will log this, so we must mention it. It would not be
indexed or linked to the other data collected though.

> This data would allow us to estimate the number of pgadmin
> instances running worldwide, its global distribution and
> language usage (and resulting from that, which additional
> languages should be supported).
> Number of registered servers and versions will give us some
> hint about the server side.

Yes. I would love to see this info, as long as we do not breach anyones
right to privacy, or not to be counted. But your proposal should cover
those rights.

> Dave, do you know some OSS authority to review this policy?

No, but I've included the support group in the CC to at least include a
few more people than are on -hackers.

Regards, Dave.