Many applications of universe are neglected and produce frustration in users

Thank you for the feedback. I must agree with the sentiment. Unfortunately, this is not actionable as a bug report, and so must be marked "Invalid". If you could please report all the things that don't work, we'll try to get them sorted. Also, if you have any ideas about how to determine if a given application works, I'd encourage you to define a specification for something like "only-ship-working-software".

One can just measure not only install stats but uninstall and usage time. Nobody wants to use unusable software so it will be uninstalled, highlighting something is wrong with it.
So software quality can be measured along with popularity.

I believe that is already tracked to some degree, but I don't know how much it is integrated into Add/Remove programs. Do you think such a determination could be made from the information available from popcon.ubuntu.com ?

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.

Wow! Zim gets almost no bug triage. Still, the bugs against zim are actionable, whereas this bug is not as originally stated.

Separately, I think there is likely value in finding a way to determine the set of applications that are useless or don't work, and that noticing when users install them, and immediately uninstall them can help, and that this data could be used to generate a blacklist for released packages. I just don't think that a bug is the way to fix that: it needs more thought and discussion, and affects lots of places (multiple packages, possible privacy concerns for collecting user data, changes to the repository management system, etc.). As such, generating a specification is more likely to provide a useful response by people who might be able to implement such a system.

Where is the right place to do it, please?. Thanks.

I'd start by drafting a spec on the wiki (see https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FeatureSpecifications), and registering it on Launchpad. To get it approved usually requires significant effort to identify how it might be implemented, but once it exists, you may be able to garner community support to help figure out a good model.

Note that the current implementation of the archive management software doesn't support hosting applications that aren't released, so once the spec was done, it may be held up for some time pending the resolution of infrastructural issues.