Meta list for programming libraries

[brillout]

I find awesome lists particularly useful for finding libraries and I don't use the learning material part.

Making a meta list focusing on libraries and containing only awesome lists that curate libraries has following advantages

• Better overview. ~4 times less lists.
• Higher quality requirements. Many lists focus is on learning material and neglect the library part. These are not included in the meta list for programming libraries.
• Improved UI. Since most libraries are hosted on GitHub, a tailored UI can be built, e.g. something like http://devarchy.com/react-components.

The obvious drawback is having two similar meta lists which may lead to confusion.

Beyond that the goal is to increase awareness that awesome lists are a good way to find libraries. Most programmers I meet don't know about awesome lists so there is likely lot's of potential.

I've started creating such programming library meta list.

[sindresorhus]

I think great awesome lists have a good balance of libraries vs. learning material. I don't see why you would separate those things. Awesome lists are about quality, not quantity.

Many lists focus is on learning material and neglect the library part.

Unless they're explicitly about learning, I would say those lists fail. Open an issue with the maintainer if you encounter that.

Improved UI. Since most libraries are hosted on GitHub, a tailored UI can be built, e.g. something like http://devarchy.com/react-components.

Awesome lists are on GitHub. It would no longer be an Awesome list then.

[brillout]

I don't see why you would separate those things

To focus on the quality. A poor library list without any learning material will not make it to a meta list. But a poor library list with great learning material would and does make it to a meta list.

Awesome lists are on GitHub. It would no longer be an Awesome list then.

Same view here and devarchy is and will be two-way synced with GitHub.

Open an issue with the maintainer

Yea and it's precisely what I'm doing with awesome-vue. Sometimes it's not enough though and a fork is required and this is actually happening with awesome-react.

The overall goal is to improve the library curation situation.

Awesome lists have remarkable characteristics.

[itsjtwright]

I don't know if I am right, but are you talking about a best of the best list? Like a list that has higher standards then regular awesome lists?

[nikitavoloboev]

I have been curating my own version of awesome lists but I unify everything and distribute it as a mind map with an index.

Take a look at it. I find there is still issue with discoverability and I feel like mind maps, at least for me, solve the issue of giving contextual knowledge of how each idea/topic relates to another idea/topic.

Each node in the mind map is another mind map and it can go as deep as needed. All in all its a more visual and approachable representation of knowledge, I feel like.

Just to get a feel for what each mind map is like, here is one for blogs I like, quora communities, reddit subreddits, image albums I am curating, websites I frequent and few github repositories I like but the list goes on of course. This is just a glimpse of it.

[brillout]

@itsjtwright I mean having lists focused on libraries only. E.g. awesome-react VS awesome-react-components or awesome-angular-components VS awesome-angular.

@nikitavoloboev Oh wow nice.