On 2023-07-05 00:00, Christopher Barker wrote:
I'm noting this, because I think it's part of the problem to be solved, but maybe not the mainone (to me anyway). I've been focused more on "these packages are worthwhile, by some definition of worthwhile). While I think Chris A is more focused on "which of these seemingly similar packages should I use?" -- not unrelated, but not the same question either.
I noticed this in the discussion and I think it's an important difference in how people approach this question. Basically what some people want from a curated index is "this package is not junk" while others want "this package is actually good" or even "you should use this package for this purpose". I think that providing "not-junk level" curation is somewhat more tractable, because this form of curation is closer to a logical OR on different people's opinions. It may be that many people tried a package and didn't find it useful, but if at least one person did find it useful, then we can probably say it's not junk. Providing "actually-good level" curation or "recommendations" is harder, because it means you actually have to address differences of opinion among curators. Personally I tend to think a not-junk type curation is the better one to aim at, for a few reasons. First, it's easier. Second, it eliminates one of the main problems with trying to search for packages on pypi, namely the huge number of "mytestpackage1"-type packages. Third, this is what conda-forge does and it seems to be working pretty well there. -- Brendan Barnwell "Do not follow where the path may lead. Go, instead, where there is no path, and leave a trail." --author unknown