Re: [julia-users] Re: so many plotting packages

Independent approaches and a large number of largely experimental packages is the nature of open source development, yes, and may provide lots of creative new solutions. But to keep a technical language useful and attractive I think it is a very big advantage if there are defined standards, and

Re: [julia-users] Re: so many plotting packages

I want to second what Isaiah said. It can make sense to "bless" packages as the default packages where people should look at. But that people are doing independent approaches is the very nature of open source which will (and should not) change. Often it even happens that stating with a fresh ap

Re: [julia-users] Re: so many plotting packages

> > the julia community would benefit by collecting all these packages in one > place. > There are only 3 or 4 of those packages that should be recommended for general use. If someone wants to help users decide what package to use, write up a comparison page with examples. It could be linked from

[julia-users] Re: so many plotting packages

i wasn't looking for recommendations. am happily using gadfly. started out with pyplot three years ago. rather, i just think the julia community would benefit by collecting all these packages in one place. since tbreloff appears to want to keep an iron grip

[julia-users] Re: so many plotting packages

Just use Plots.jl. JuliaPlots and Plots.jl is essentially a metapackage/org which puts this all together into one convenient package. It works very well and should be recommended as the standard plotting package to almost everyone. On Friday, October 28, 2016 at 12:17:56 PM UTC-7, Ben Arthur wr