Missing package in search

[timholy]

In a "Doc Search" for the string SMILES, I only get one hit for https://github.com/caseykneale/OpenSMILES.jl, which is unregistered. It's great that it finds this package, but it misses the registered package https://github.com/mojaie/MolecularGraph.jl. The string SMILES appears in both the README.md and in the doc pages (e.g., https://mojaie.github.io/MolecularGraph.jl/dev/moleculargraph/io/#SMILES/SMARTS).

That package is not absent from juliahub's indexing, for example the search string inchi retrieves the package.

I'm sure that package could improve discoverability (e.g, it should add "chemistry" as a tag), but the missing string seems to be a way that juliahub itself could improve.

[timholy]

Another example: do a documentation search for "Kruskal". It doesn't find HypothesisTests.jl while it does find Pingouin.jl.

A related comment is that from https://juliahub.com/ui/Home the "explore" box lists "packages" and "search." If you click "Packages" it takes you to a page that explains "Find Julia packages by name, org, tag or license." If you click "Search" you're taken to a page that has tabbed options, "Packages", "Documentation", "Symbols", and "Code". But there is less documentation spelling out the restrictions applicable to these choices; for instance, naively I'd not be sure that the default "search packages" doesn't include a documentation search (presumably, it's the same "Find Julia packages by name, org, tag or license" that one arrives at by picking the "packages" link from "Home"). That's a bit bad because it's the default and it's a very limited search, where you pretty much have to know the package name you're looking for (which may be fine for us experts, but may not be so good for newbies).

I think it might be better to make the doc-inclusive search the default? Or perhaps just have one kind of search that starts out covering everything and then let users narrow it? (One downside with that proposal is that the "code" search shows multiple hits per package, which may be fine in some circumstances but probably not what a "I'm just trying to find a package that lets me do X" searcher would want.)

[pfitzseb]

In a sense this is "just" a matter of finding the right UX. Well, that, and the trifling matter of figuring out a good rating algorithm that does what users expect... But yes, a properly unified search is definitely the goal here.

[timholy]

Can this get a search label added to it?

[timholy]

:heart:

[timholy]

Another example:

despite https://juliaarrays.github.io/StaticArrays.jl/stable/pages/api/#FieldVector.

[pfitzseb]

Weird, that query seems to be case-sensitive for some reason:

[timholy]

Bump. This comes up annually in my teaching (it will today) where I have to apologize for the fact that the documentation search consistently misses "go-to" packages. I'd be thrilled if this could instead be fixed, say before spring 2024 when I next teach this.

[timholy]

xref #144