Can someone please recommend a library for music synthesis?
The only thing I came across (not my area) was this http://worp.zevv.nl/
Awesome-lua: A curated list of Lua packages and resources
21–30 of 40 posts
Re: Awesome-lua: A curated list of Lua packages and resources
#22There is another awesome-lua list that predates this one: https://github.com/forhappy/awesome-lua The "master list": https://github.com/bayandin/awesome-awesomeness
Indeed; I have no claim to originality. The pre-existing list is (extremely) incomplete, and gives a laundry list of outdated and unmaintained libraries which are often not useful or broadly relevant. Such entries dilute the usefulness of all other entries on the list, so I made this version to avoid that (and to be more complete).
Re: Awesome-lua: A curated list of Lua packages and resources
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a totally valid point which I considered, but I think the association of awesome- for lists like this is more valuable, since part of the purpose is to make it accessible for people outside the lua world (who probably won't know about awesomeWM anyway).
But you make life a lot more difficult for people who do use the Awesome Window Manager, because it becomes much harder for us to find solutions to problems using Google for instance.
'awesome-lua' is not typically a phrase/term referring to the Awesome WM. On GitHub, there is only one awesome-wm-related repo by the name `awesome-lua`; it's just one person's configuration and hasn't been updated since 2012. I don't think I'm stepping on anybody's toes here.
Typically, the window manager is referred to as either just 'awesome' or as 'awesome wm'. awesome-lua is not a name conflict with 'awesome' or with 'awesome wm', and the worst case for search results is that awesome-lua shows up and bumps everything else down by one spot. As klibertp suggested, adding 'wm' to your query makes awesome-lua not show up at all; claiming that I 'make life a lot more difficult' is rather silly.
Re: Awesome-lua: A curated list of Lua packages and resources
#24Your list of section anchor links appears to be broken. I click on any and nothing happens. Otherwise I look forward to browsing it.
Re: Awesome-lua: A curated list of Lua packages and resources
#25Why isn't a search engine sufficient for discovering packages and resources? Historically, human-edited lists don't have a long archival lifetime, e.g. original Yahoo, DMOZ, Mahalo. If curation is better than search, why is a curated list better hosted at github than Wikipedia, which has a lower technical cost of editing? If the problem is Wikipedia moderation, who will reconcile multiple github curated lists? Is the…
Maybe the way to judge curation is by comparing curation+search to search alone. With good curation effort, i think that curation+search is a winner , at a relatively minor cost(needing more time).
Also curation has the benefit of being a useful discovery tool.
Re: Awesome-lua: A curated list of Lua packages and resources
#26Why isn't a search engine sufficient for discovering packages and resources? Historically, human-edited lists don't have a long archival lifetime, e.g. original Yahoo, DMOZ, Mahalo. If curation is better than search, why is a curated list better hosted at github than Wikipedia, which has a lower technical cost of editing? If the problem is Wikipedia moderation, who will reconcile multiple github curated lists? Is the…
A search engine is technically sufficient, but takes more time and is less accessible. A search engine won't put things in front of you for you to peruse and explore; you have to know what you're looking for. Beyond that, the contributors and I have done research to find and decide on the entries on this list, which should help readers avoid repeating the same process.
A git repo has an explicitly responsible maintainer, while wikipedia articles do not. This helps keep the quality high.
Regarding SEO - even now, the same day I first pushed this, searching 'lua awesome' returns this as result #5 on Google. 'awesome-' is a known convention for curated lists like this one, and people familiar with that convention who are looking for Lua resources will easily find this.
Re: Awesome-lua: A curated list of Lua packages and resources
#27Your list of section anchor links appears to be broken. I click on any and nothing happens. Otherwise I look forward to browsing it.
Hm, they work fine for me; can you be more specific?
Re: Awesome-lua: A curated list of Lua packages and resources
#28Why isn't a search engine sufficient for discovering packages and resources? Historically, human-edited lists don't have a long archival lifetime, e.g. original Yahoo, DMOZ, Mahalo. If curation is better than search, why is a curated list better hosted at github than Wikipedia, which has a lower technical cost of editing? If the problem is Wikipedia moderation, who will reconcile multiple github curated lists? Is the…
A search engine is technically sufficient, but takes more time and is less accessible. A search engine won't put things in front of you for you to peruse and explore; you have to know what you're looking for. Beyond that, the contributors and I have done research to find and decide on the entries on this list, which should help readers avoid repeating the same process. A git repo has an explicitly responsible maintai…
> the contributors and I have done research to find and decide on the entries on this list
It would be helpful to have a summary of selection criteria at the top of the list, in addition to the longer version on the Contributing file.
If such curated lists were also available in JSON, developers could meta-curate a locally searchable union of all their upstream projects. It would then be easy to update, annotate or cross-reference lists.
Re: Awesome-lua: A curated list of Lua packages and resources
#29Some more packages are on the LuaForge list: http://luaforge.net/projects/
(though LuaForge looks outdated)
Thanks for curating the list!
Re: Awesome-lua: A curated list of Lua packages and resources
#30Why isn't a search engine sufficient for discovering packages and resources? Historically, human-edited lists don't have a long archival lifetime, e.g. original Yahoo, DMOZ, Mahalo. If curation is better than search, why is a curated list better hosted at github than Wikipedia, which has a lower technical cost of editing? If the problem is Wikipedia moderation, who will reconcile multiple github curated lists? Is the…
Maybe the way to judge curation is by comparing curation+search to search alone. With good curation effort, i think that curation+search is a winner , at a relatively minor cost(needing more time). Also curation has the benefit of being a useful discovery tool.
In theory, https://www.openhub.net/p?r&q=lua could construct/curate such lists from project activity analytics.