To me the main benefit of having a list of non-packages would be that we could have code their without having to go through the whole name bikeshedding process that is traditional for registered Julia packages (and which I think is very important, if imperfect).
On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Tomas Lycken <[email protected]> wrote: > I have always regarded the version tagging system as an indicator of > package "ready-state", and not only as "progress since the package was > concieved/first released". For example, I've registered the > Interpolations.jl package in Metadata, but I haven't tagged a version, so > if I do Pkg.status() it shows as version `0.0.0-` - to me, that works as an > indicator that this package isn't as ready as a package with a version of, > say, 1.2.5, or even 0.3.1. > > It would probably be quite simple to add a filtering feature for package > versions on pkg.julialang.org - nothing too specific, of course, but one > could for example choose to include all packages, just packages with a > tagged version, or even just packages version 1.0 or later. That would be a > simple answer to most of the questions you raise, albeit maybe not as > specific as you might want. However, it would have the benefit of curating > itself. > > // T > > > On Monday, December 22, 2014 5:23:43 PM UTC+1, Hans W Borchers wrote: >> >> There's a list (of such lists) at http://svaksha.github.io/Julia.jl/ . >> But you are right: something more complete and more up-to-date would be >> nice. >> I started an overview of Math packages with usage examples, but stopped >> when the Julia 0.4 version came about. >> >> >> On Monday, December 22, 2014 4:59:24 PM UTC+1, [email protected] >> wrote: >>> >>> Does it make sense to have a list of unregistered packages ? I'd like >>> to make my packages visible, for feedback or whatever, and also to see what >>> other packages are out there. >>> >>> Putting a new package that no one has used in the same list as a heavily >>> used/developed package doesn't seem right. >>> My packages have interfaces that are too big, and need to be >>> pruned/altered after people use them. Still, it would be nice >>> to be able to install them easily, so maybe a separate metadata repo, or >>> a tag 'experimental' would work. (It would not make sense to register them >>> in another list and then still call them 'unregistered') I guess Julia >>> will have to deal with something like this sooner or later. >>> >>> github says there are about 2000 Julia repos. Surely not all are meant >>> to be packages. I have a Swap.jl repo on github just so I can install it >>> easily myself. But I wonder how many of the 2000 are useable packages? >>> >>> This must have been discussed already somewhere, but I can't find it. >>> >>>
