1. 5

“I have a feeling this idea is a lot like documentation. Everyone wants it but no one wants to do it.”

  1.  

  2. 4

    It’s more lightweight than the curation proposed here, but there’s been a small trend of minimal curation in the form of lists. Someone starts a Github page that just lists maintained, reliable libraries for a particular language, and accepts pull requests to collaboratively keep the list up to date. These seem to be called “awesome-X” for various languages X. I believe the first one was awesome-php, which inspired awesome-python, which in turn inspired awesome-go, awesome-cl, etc. There are now hundreds of them, although there’s then a second problem: the lists aren’t all up to date or of good quality.

    1. 3

      I see you’re new here. :)

      There’s probably money to be made here. I would pay $10 a month for a list of libraries that are currently in use by somebody I know.

      Curiously I think the monstrous dependency lists may be a result of this. I’m writing a small web app. I have no idea what libraries work. So I grab a web app I know works, which is probably 100x bigger than my app will ever be, and delete all the code but keep all the dependencies. Surely the author of this project vetted them so I don’t have to.

      1. 1

        i wonder if there’s a way to do tree-shaking but for libraries. probably easier in a language with good namespacing support, but even in javascript it should be (theoretically) possible to analyse code/program execution and say “you are depending on but using nothing from this library”