Great suggestions/discussion everyone. I think without a stronger vote of confidence in the idea there isn't much reason to proceed.
Re: svaksha's list, it is good, and I'd be curious how much traffic it gets. Its kinda chaotic though and has some errors, mainly because its pretty hard to be an expert in everything (and thus able to describe and categorize them). Plus there is the whole problem of the many pieces of code that get mentioned on the list but are unmaintained - testing related packages being my personal favourite. I've got some ideas for changes to pkg.julialang.org that would raise the prominence of organizations, who I think should be the ones leading discoverability of the packages in their realm as they know their area best. I'm also thinking of more ways to indicate package "quality"/development level for integration in the UI (see the Github stars I added recently). I'm going to collect a bunch of metrics and mash them together - we can then discuss the weightings. Hans: understandable you wouldn't have heard about CVX.jl yet, its not ready for public consumption. Should be ready by end of summer, at least a first pass. As for BlackBoxOptim, I'm not sure if you are implying some effort by myself or others to exclude it from JuliaOpt or METADATA, but that isn't the case - the author just hasn't done the work to list it. I've just reached out to him again, but if you are interested in it, then you should help out - this is open source after all, and we are all busy with other things. On Wednesday, July 2, 2014 2:31:32 AM UTC-4, Hans W Borchers wrote: > > Thanks for the hint to this very helpful list of (mostly) not-metadated > packages. I started a list of Numerical Math packages for Julia myself, > because I did not find categorized or compiled information like here. Only > I am missing more information on optimization and simulation packages out > there. > > I think it is not so much a question of whether a package has enough > quality to be listed as a registered package. There will be package > developments going on for one or two years before they will appear on the > 'official' list, but I would still like to know about them. > > For example, I learned only from John Miles White's report on JuliaCon > about the CVX.jl package, though I had made a request about "convex > programming" on the julia-opt list some weeks ago. > > There is a useful BlackBoxOptim.jl package for global optimization that > has made it neither on the METADATA list nor on JuliaOpt page. I don't know > the reason, but the author seemed highly interested to see it there. > > Maybe, on the list of registered packages there should only appear > "recommended packages" (in the sense R adds them to the base installation). > And yes, information about other available packages needs to be improved -- > but perhaps this is more the task of the community, not of the core > developers, in the form of blogs or more pages like Svaksha's. > > > On Wednesday, July 2, 2014 4:51:03 AM UTC+2, Isaiah wrote: >> >> On the discoverability side, svaksha's curated collection really deserves >> more attention - it is categorized and provides short summaries of code >> ranging from listed packages to useful fragments that never showed up on >> the mailing lists. >> >> http://svaksha.github.io/Julia.jl/ >> >> >
