I think that's what we should do. On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 1:04 PM, John Myles White <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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]> > 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. >>>> >>>> > >
