The "curated package sets" on PyPI idea sounds a bit like Steam's curator
lists, which I like to think of as Twitter for game reviews. You can follow a
curator to see their comments on particular games, and the most popular
curators have their comments appear on the actual listings too.
Might be interesting to see how something like that worked for PyPI, though the
initial investment is pretty high. (It doesn't solve the coherent bundle
problem either, just the discovery of good libraries problem.)
Top-posted from my Windows Phone
-----Original Message-----
From: "Donald Stufft" <don...@stufft.io>
Sent: 12/15/2016 4:21
To: "Freddy Rietdijk" <freddyrietd...@fridh.nl>
Cc: "DistUtils mailing list" <Distutils-Sig@python.org>; "Barry Warsaw"
<ba...@python.org>
Subject: Re: [Distutils] Maintaining a curated set of Python packages
On Dec 15, 2016, at 7:13 AM, Freddy Rietdijk <freddyrietd...@fridh.nl> wrote:
> Putting the conclusion first, I do see value in better publicising
> "Recommended libraries" based on some automated criteria like:
Yes, we should recommend third-party libraries in a trusted place like the
documentation of CPython. The amount of packages that are available can be
overwhelming. Yet, defining a set of packages that are recommended, and perhaps
working together, is still far from defining an exact set of packages that are
known to work together, something which I proposed here.
We could theoretically bake this into PyPI itself, though I’m not sure if that
makes sense.
We could also probably bake something like “curated package sets” into PyPI
where individual users (or groups of users) can create their own view of PyPI
for people to use, while still relying on all of the infrastructure of PyPI.
Although I’m not sure that makes any sense either.
—
Donald Stufft
_______________________________________________
Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
