It would be really easy to run a GitHub page that is literally a list of URL’s for unofficial packages and which receives edits via GitHub pull requests.
— John > On Dec 22, 2014, at 12:03 PM, Stefan Karpinski <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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] > <mailto:[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 <http://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/ > <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. > >
