Re: [julia-users] I'd like to see something like the Rust platform proposal in the Julia ecosystem

['Tobias Knopp' via julia-users]

I think that Steven has a point here. Technically we have all in place and 
Tims "Reexport" snipped is indeed the solution for creating Matlab like 
toolboxes. Its quite interesting that nobody has yet done such a 
metapackage. Maybe its because those users knowing the packages like the 
fine-grained control and therefore don't require a big metapackage?

I also think that the large amount of research users naturally leads to 
many smaller packages that are formed in a bottom up process and therefore 
are quite inhomogeneous.

In my opinion it would need two ingredients to improve on this front
- It would be good to find areas, where there are many smaller incompatible 
packages that would benefit from a unification/reorganization.
- In my opinion it would also need some popularity system that makes it 
dead simple to know, which is the standard package for a common task and 
which is much more experimental.

Maybe it could also work trying to make a top down analysis: What are the 
10 main packages a user could search for?

Best

Tobias
 

Am Montag, 1. August 2016 17:36:56 UTC+2 schrieb Steven Sagaert:
>
> When I say "work well together" I don't just mean that their versions 
> technically work together without errors, but also that they match 
> stylistically and that the datastructures that they expect as input/output 
> match so that no excessive translation and/or copying of data is needed 
> which is bad for performance and style.  That kind of discussion is for 
> example happening in OCAML to come to a platform and how to resolve the 
> ocaml standard lib vs Jane street lib schism.
>
> On Monday, August 1, 2016 at 5:19:17 PM UTC+2, Steven Sagaert wrote:
>>
>> I think the most important part of it is the idea of having a second 
>> (beyond the standard lib that comes with the runtime) larger, optional 
>> layer of curated libs that are known to work together. That together with 
>> the metapackage idea for easy inclusion ( maybe with possible overrides as 
>> in the Rust proposal) would be very handy for people who do not do Julia 
>> coding all the time and hence cannot follow the larger package ecosystem 
>> closely. People who do not want this second layer could still just use the 
>> standard lib + whatever packages they want. One could even extend this to 
>> multiple layer, each one more optional and lighter curated: standard lib -> 
>> platform light -> extended paltform -> ...
>>
>> Now there is already a good attempt in the julia ecosystem to group 
>> related packages in webpages and try to avoid too much libraries that do 
>> the same or partially overlap (more like scientific Python, rather than the 
>> R jungle) and that's great, but per group there still  are several 
>> competing packages and sometimes it's unclear from the descriptions to pick 
>> a clear winner. A curated subset of these "the platform"  by the community 
>> that adrresses the most common needs except maybe for special niches, would 
>> be very helpful. That's all :)
>>
>> On Monday, August 1, 2016 at 4:33:24 PM UTC+2, Stefan Karpinski wrote:
>>>
>>> There's a fair amount of discussion of the Rust Platform proposal over 
>>> here:
>>>
>>> https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/proposal-the-rust-platform/3745
>>>
>>> In short there's a lack of agreement to this in Rust. Moreover, in Rust, 
>>> different versions of libraries are much more closely locked to each other, 
>>> whereas in Julia the coupling is much looser. Steven, since you're in favor 
>>> of this idea, can you explain why you think it's a good idea for Julia? 
>>> What problems does it solve?
>>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 7:31 AM, Tony Kelman  wrote:
>>>
 The vision I personally have for this would be something more like SUSE 
 Studio (https://susestudio.com/) where it's just a few clicks, or a 
 configuration file in the build system, that could give you a set of 
 default-installed packages of your choosing, and make installers for your 
 own custom "spins" of a Julia-with-packages distribution.



 On Monday, August 1, 2016 at 2:08:06 AM UTC-7, Tim Holy wrote:
>
> module MyMetaPackage 
>
> using Reexport 
>
> @reexport using PackageA 
> @reexport using PackageB 
> ... 
>
> end 
>
> Best. 
> --Tim 
>
> On Monday, August 1, 2016 1:48:47 AM CDT Steven Sagaert wrote: 
> > is more than just a webpage with a list of packages... for starters 
> the 
> > concept of metapackage. 
> > 
> > On Monday, August 1, 2016 at 10:25:33 AM UTC+2, Tamas Papp wrote: 
> > > Maybe you already know about it, but there is a curated list of 
> packages 
> > > at https://github.com/svaksha/Julia.jl 
> > > 
> > > On Mon, Aug 01 2016, Steven Sagaert wrote: 
> > > > see https://aturon.github.io/blog/2016/07/27/rust-platform/ 
>
>
>
>>>

Re: [julia-users] I'd like to see something like the Rust platform proposal in the Julia ecosystem

[Steven Sagaert]

When I say "work well together" I don't just mean that their versions 
technically work together without errors, but also that they match 
stylistically and that the datastructures that they expect as input/output 
match so that no excessive translation and/or copying of data is needed 
which is bad for performance and style.  That kind of discussion is for 
example happening in OCAML to come to a platform and how to resolve the 
ocaml standard lib vs Jane street lib schism.

On Monday, August 1, 2016 at 5:19:17 PM UTC+2, Steven Sagaert wrote:
>
> I think the most important part of it is the idea of having a second 
> (beyond the standard lib that comes with the runtime) larger, optional 
> layer of curated libs that are known to work together. That together with 
> the metapackage idea for easy inclusion ( maybe with possible overrides as 
> in the Rust proposal) would be very handy for people who do not do Julia 
> coding all the time and hence cannot follow the larger package ecosystem 
> closely. People who do not want this second layer could still just use the 
> standard lib + whatever packages they want. One could even extend this to 
> multiple layer, each one more optional and lighter curated: standard lib -> 
> platform light -> extended paltform -> ...
>
> Now there is already a good attempt in the julia ecosystem to group 
> related packages in webpages and try to avoid too much libraries that do 
> the same or partially overlap (more like scientific Python, rather than the 
> R jungle) and that's great, but per group there still  are several 
> competing packages and sometimes it's unclear from the descriptions to pick 
> a clear winner. A curated subset of these "the platform"  by the community 
> that adrresses the most common needs except maybe for special niches, would 
> be very helpful. That's all :)
>
> On Monday, August 1, 2016 at 4:33:24 PM UTC+2, Stefan Karpinski wrote:
>>
>> There's a fair amount of discussion of the Rust Platform proposal over 
>> here:
>>
>> https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/proposal-the-rust-platform/3745
>>
>> In short there's a lack of agreement to this in Rust. Moreover, in Rust, 
>> different versions of libraries are much more closely locked to each other, 
>> whereas in Julia the coupling is much looser. Steven, since you're in favor 
>> of this idea, can you explain why you think it's a good idea for Julia? 
>> What problems does it solve?
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 7:31 AM, Tony Kelman  wrote:
>>
>>> The vision I personally have for this would be something more like SUSE 
>>> Studio (https://susestudio.com/) where it's just a few clicks, or a 
>>> configuration file in the build system, that could give you a set of 
>>> default-installed packages of your choosing, and make installers for your 
>>> own custom "spins" of a Julia-with-packages distribution.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Monday, August 1, 2016 at 2:08:06 AM UTC-7, Tim Holy wrote:

 module MyMetaPackage 

 using Reexport 

 @reexport using PackageA 
 @reexport using PackageB 
 ... 

 end 

 Best. 
 --Tim 

 On Monday, August 1, 2016 1:48:47 AM CDT Steven Sagaert wrote: 
 > is more than just a webpage with a list of packages... for starters 
 the 
 > concept of metapackage. 
 > 
 > On Monday, August 1, 2016 at 10:25:33 AM UTC+2, Tamas Papp wrote: 
 > > Maybe you already know about it, but there is a curated list of 
 packages 
 > > at https://github.com/svaksha/Julia.jl 
 > > 
 > > On Mon, Aug 01 2016, Steven Sagaert wrote: 
 > > > see https://aturon.github.io/blog/2016/07/27/rust-platform/ 



>>

Re: [julia-users] I'd like to see something like the Rust platform proposal in the Julia ecosystem

[Steven Sagaert]

I think the most important part of it is the idea of having a second 
(beyond the standard lib that comes with the runtime) larger, optional 
layer of curated libs that are known to work together. That together with 
the metapackage idea for easy inclusion ( maybe with possible overrides as 
in the Rust proposal) would be very handy for people who do not do Julia 
coding all the time and hence cannot follow the larger package ecosystem 
closely. People who do not want this second layer could still just use the 
standard lib + whatever packages they want. One could even extend this to 
multiple layer, each one more optional and lighter curated: standard lib -> 
platform light -> extended paltform -> ...

Now there is already a good attempt in the julia ecosystem to group related 
packages in webpages and try to avoid too much libraries that do the same 
or partially overlap (more like scientific Python, rather than the R 
jungle) and that's great, but per group there still  are several competing 
packages and sometimes it's unclear from the descriptions to pick a clear 
winner. A curated subset of these "the platform"  by the community that 
adrresses the most common needs except maybe for special niches, would be 
very helpful. That's all :)

On Monday, August 1, 2016 at 4:33:24 PM UTC+2, Stefan Karpinski wrote:
>
> There's a fair amount of discussion of the Rust Platform proposal over 
> here:
>
> https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/proposal-the-rust-platform/3745
>
> In short there's a lack of agreement to this in Rust. Moreover, in Rust, 
> different versions of libraries are much more closely locked to each other, 
> whereas in Julia the coupling is much looser. Steven, since you're in favor 
> of this idea, can you explain why you think it's a good idea for Julia? 
> What problems does it solve?
>
> On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 7:31 AM, Tony Kelman  > wrote:
>
>> The vision I personally have for this would be something more like SUSE 
>> Studio (https://susestudio.com/) where it's just a few clicks, or a 
>> configuration file in the build system, that could give you a set of 
>> default-installed packages of your choosing, and make installers for your 
>> own custom "spins" of a Julia-with-packages distribution.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Monday, August 1, 2016 at 2:08:06 AM UTC-7, Tim Holy wrote:
>>>
>>> module MyMetaPackage 
>>>
>>> using Reexport 
>>>
>>> @reexport using PackageA 
>>> @reexport using PackageB 
>>> ... 
>>>
>>> end 
>>>
>>> Best. 
>>> --Tim 
>>>
>>> On Monday, August 1, 2016 1:48:47 AM CDT Steven Sagaert wrote: 
>>> > is more than just a webpage with a list of packages... for starters 
>>> the 
>>> > concept of metapackage. 
>>> > 
>>> > On Monday, August 1, 2016 at 10:25:33 AM UTC+2, Tamas Papp wrote: 
>>> > > Maybe you already know about it, but there is a curated list of 
>>> packages 
>>> > > at https://github.com/svaksha/Julia.jl 
>>> > > 
>>> > > On Mon, Aug 01 2016, Steven Sagaert wrote: 
>>> > > > see https://aturon.github.io/blog/2016/07/27/rust-platform/ 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>

Re: [julia-users] I'd like to see something like the Rust platform proposal in the Julia ecosystem

[Stefan Karpinski]

There's a fair amount of discussion of the Rust Platform proposal over here:

https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/proposal-the-rust-platform/3745

In short there's a lack of agreement to this in Rust. Moreover, in Rust,
different versions of libraries are much more closely locked to each other,
whereas in Julia the coupling is much looser. Steven, since you're in favor
of this idea, can you explain why you think it's a good idea for Julia?
What problems does it solve?

On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 7:31 AM, Tony Kelman  wrote:

> The vision I personally have for this would be something more like SUSE
> Studio (https://susestudio.com/) where it's just a few clicks, or a
> configuration file in the build system, that could give you a set of
> default-installed packages of your choosing, and make installers for your
> own custom "spins" of a Julia-with-packages distribution.
>
>
>
> On Monday, August 1, 2016 at 2:08:06 AM UTC-7, Tim Holy wrote:
>>
>> module MyMetaPackage
>>
>> using Reexport
>>
>> @reexport using PackageA
>> @reexport using PackageB
>> ...
>>
>> end
>>
>> Best.
>> --Tim
>>
>> On Monday, August 1, 2016 1:48:47 AM CDT Steven Sagaert wrote:
>> > is more than just a webpage with a list of packages... for starters the
>> > concept of metapackage.
>> >
>> > On Monday, August 1, 2016 at 10:25:33 AM UTC+2, Tamas Papp wrote:
>> > > Maybe you already know about it, but there is a curated list of
>> packages
>> > > at https://github.com/svaksha/Julia.jl
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, Aug 01 2016, Steven Sagaert wrote:
>> > > > see https://aturon.github.io/blog/2016/07/27/rust-platform/
>>
>>
>>

Re: [julia-users] I'd like to see something like the Rust platform proposal in the Julia ecosystem

[Tony Kelman]

The vision I personally have for this would be something more like SUSE 
Studio (https://susestudio.com/) where it's just a few clicks, or a 
configuration file in the build system, that could give you a set of 
default-installed packages of your choosing, and make installers for your 
own custom "spins" of a Julia-with-packages distribution.


On Monday, August 1, 2016 at 2:08:06 AM UTC-7, Tim Holy wrote:
>
> module MyMetaPackage 
>
> using Reexport 
>
> @reexport using PackageA 
> @reexport using PackageB 
> ... 
>
> end 
>
> Best. 
> --Tim 
>
> On Monday, August 1, 2016 1:48:47 AM CDT Steven Sagaert wrote: 
> > is more than just a webpage with a list of packages... for starters the 
> > concept of metapackage. 
> > 
> > On Monday, August 1, 2016 at 10:25:33 AM UTC+2, Tamas Papp wrote: 
> > > Maybe you already know about it, but there is a curated list of 
> packages 
> > > at https://github.com/svaksha/Julia.jl 
> > > 
> > > On Mon, Aug 01 2016, Steven Sagaert wrote: 
> > > > see https://aturon.github.io/blog/2016/07/27/rust-platform/ 
>
>
>

Re: [julia-users] I'd like to see something like the Rust platform proposal in the Julia ecosystem

[Tim Holy]

module MyMetaPackage

using Reexport

@reexport using PackageA
@reexport using PackageB
...

end

Best.
--Tim

On Monday, August 1, 2016 1:48:47 AM CDT Steven Sagaert wrote:
> is more than just a webpage with a list of packages... for starters the
> concept of metapackage.
> 
> On Monday, August 1, 2016 at 10:25:33 AM UTC+2, Tamas Papp wrote:
> > Maybe you already know about it, but there is a curated list of packages
> > at https://github.com/svaksha/Julia.jl
> > 
> > On Mon, Aug 01 2016, Steven Sagaert wrote:
> > > see https://aturon.github.io/blog/2016/07/27/rust-platform/

Re: [julia-users] I'd like to see something like the Rust platform proposal in the Julia ecosystem

[Steven Sagaert]

is more than just a webpage with a list of packages... for starters the 
concept of metapackage.

On Monday, August 1, 2016 at 10:25:33 AM UTC+2, Tamas Papp wrote:
>
> Maybe you already know about it, but there is a curated list of packages 
> at https://github.com/svaksha/Julia.jl 
>
> On Mon, Aug 01 2016, Steven Sagaert wrote: 
>
> > see https://aturon.github.io/blog/2016/07/27/rust-platform/ 
>
>

Re: [julia-users] I'd like to see something like the Rust platform proposal in the Julia ecosystem

[Tamas Papp]

Maybe you already know about it, but there is a curated list of packages
at https://github.com/svaksha/Julia.jl

On Mon, Aug 01 2016, Steven Sagaert wrote:

> see https://aturon.github.io/blog/2016/07/27/rust-platform/