I don't know what organizations would look like in this area, but more generally, there's been discussion around discoverability of packages. Even for a set of packages that would get no advantage development- or consistency- wise from bringing them under an organization (or if there's not agreement on how narrow/broad any eventual organizations should be), discoverability can be improved separately: JuliaLang/julia#6807 <https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/6807>
On Thursday, January 29, 2015 at 9:50:14 AM UTC-7, Stefan Karpinski wrote: > > That's fair – I'm not entirely sure those should all go in one > organization, but it suppose it could be helpful to have a sort of > catch-all organization for mathematical packages that don't yet have a more > specialized organization to live in. > > On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Hans W Borchers <hwbor...@gmail.com > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> There's not so much about number theory at the moment, it's more a >> prospect of >> future contributions. >> >> How would you name an organization that, e.g., could include packages like >> >> Calculus[2], Roots >> Polynomial[s], TaylorSeries >> Elliptic, LambertW >> ApproxFun, ApproxXD, Grid, Dierckx >> MatrixDepot, PolarFact >> Cubature, Cuhre, FastGauss >> Wavelets >> Combinatorics, Catalan, ContinuedFractions >> PrimeSieve >> >> This is not to say all these packages should be or should not be >> included. It is >> more a fast compilation by zipping through the package lists. I'm still >> missing >> more special functions, e.g the hypergeometric function. (Please don't >> point to >> Python & Scipy, its implementation of 2F1 is buggy.) >> >> I would have liked to have an overview of what mathematical functionality >> is >> available in Julia when I first came here. >> >> >> On Thursday, January 29, 2015 at 4:04:30 PM UTC+1, Stefan Karpinski wrote: >>> >>> JuliaMath seems far too broad for a name for an organization. But a >>> JuliaNumberTheory org or something would be good. Not a pithy name, so >>> something better would be welcomed. >>> >>> >>> On Jan 29, 2015, at 9:55 AM, Hans W Borchers <hwbor...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> No, the intention was not to just include MATLAB-like capabilities and >>> syntax. >>> >>> I would like to have a JuliaMath organization that could encompass all >>> kinds >>> of mathematical and numerical packages. For example also some packages >>> with >>> algebraic number theory or elliptic curves functionality, that Matlab >>> does not >>> provide in its official toolboxes, AFAIK. >>> >>> >>> On Thursday, January 29, 2015 at 3:40:01 PM UTC+1, Stefan Karpinski >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> JuliaMAT does seem like a clearer org name for Matlab/Octave >>>> compatibility and support. >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Viral Shah <vi...@mayin.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> If the goal is to support MATLAB-like capabilities and syntax, perhaps >>>>> JuliaMAT is the right organization name. This could have a variety of >>>>> matlab compatibility packages, .mat file readers, compatibility packages, >>>>> MATCall, etc. >>>>> >>>>> -viral >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> > On 29-Jan-2015, at 4:37 pm, Hans W Borchers <hwbor...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> > >>>>> > Iain, >>>>> > >>>>> > do you think it would be reasonable to set up a JuliaMath (or >>>>> JuliaNum) organization? >>>>> > After all, Julia intends to become an open source >>>>> competitor/replacement for Matlab. >>>>> > How will such a Julia organization be set up, for example. >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > On Wednesday, January 28, 2015 at 4:17:13 PM UTC+1, Iain Dunning >>>>> wrote: >>>>> > I think our equivalent of CRAN Task Views are the various >>>>> organizations, e.g. juliaopt.org. I'd like to incorporate them into >>>>> the official package listing in a more obvious way, especially as their >>>>> popularity is growing (saw JuliaGeo pop up recently, for example) >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >
