New package: Gabs v1.0.0

[JuliaRegistrator]

• Registering package: Gabs
• Repository: https://github.com/apkille/Gabs.jl
• Created by: @apkille
• Version: v1.0.0
• Commit: 478892ee27728c9fcd91d01d91ab1bd92fc1b72a
• Git reference: HEAD
• Description: Simulating Gaussian quantum information in the phase space representation.

[github-actions]

Hello, I am an automated registration bot. I help manage the registration process by checking your registration against a set of AutoMerge guidelines. If all these guidelines are met, this pull request will be merged automatically, completing your registration. It is strongly recommended to follow the guidelines, since otherwise the pull request needs to be manually reviewed and merged by a human.

1. New package registration

Please make sure that you have read the package naming guidelines.

2. AutoMerge Guidelines which are not met ❌

• Name is not at least 5 characters long

3. Needs action: here's what to do next

1. Please try to update your package to conform to these guidelines. The General registry's README has an FAQ that can help figure out how to do so.
2. After you have fixed the AutoMerge issues, simply retrigger Registrator, the same way you did in the initial registration. This will automatically update this pull request. You do not need to change the version number in your Project.toml file (unless the AutoMerge issue is that you skipped a version number).

If you need help fixing the AutoMerge issues, or want your pull request to be manually merged instead, please post a comment explaining what you need help with or why you would like this pull request to be manually merged. Then, send a message to the #pkg-registration channel in the public Julia Slack for better visibility.

4. To pause or stop registration

If you want to prevent this pull request from being auto-merged, simply leave a comment. If you want to post a comment without blocking auto-merging, you must include the text [noblock] in your comment.

Tip: You can edit blocking comments to add [noblock] in order to unblock auto-merging.

[goerz]

The name similarity is not an issue, but

Name is not at least 5 characters long

is more problematic (and I can't override it anyway). I would push for a longer, more descriptive name. GaussianBosonicSystems (which I assume is what Gabs derives from) seems perfectly suitable.

It also looks like the documentation is not deployed correctly: the links in the README do not work. It would also be good to add a paragraph or two to the README itself to give some idea of what the package is about, before people continue to the full docs.

[apkille]

@goerz thanks for the feedback. I'm aware of JuliaRegistries policy of encouraging longer names for clarity even if they seem a little long winded, but GaussianBosonicSystems is pretty long. How about GaussianBosons?

I'll fix the doc deployment and update the README.

[goerz]

GaussianBosonicSystems is pretty long

Not by Julia standards ;-) But of course, when a package name becomes "too long" is matter of taste.

How about GaussianBosons

Works for me!

[apkille]

@goerz Just a quick question: how much pushback is there on the name Gabs? I'd like something that is short, fun, and memorable if I can manage it.

[goerz]

There's some discussion on the #pgk-registration channel on Slack. The minimum line length rule is something that requires a manual merge by a full registry maintainer. So, at least one of them has to be okay with the name.

[kellertuer]

In my just very own personal opinion, the name GaussianBosonicSystems is more informative and helpful if someone is looking for a package and to that extend probably more “Julia-esque”.

[ViralBShah]

@apkille Any thoughts on the proposed name?

[goerz]

We already discussed GaussianBosonicSystems above, and I definitely agree that the shorter GaussianBosons isn’t any less descriptive and thus probably a better choice. The question is really between that and the original Gabs

[kellertuer]

Sure the shorter one is also fine with me of course.

[apkille]

@ViralBShah @goerz @kellertuer I appreciate the discussion about this. In my own opinion (feel free to disagree), a name that is long and general such as GaussianBosonicSystems or GaussianBosons is not likely to propagate out of the Julia ecosystem. I would like this package to reach physicists who are generally interested in simulating continuous variable quantum information. There are exceptions, of course, but most well-known quantum packages (in Julia and beyond) have simple and fun names such as Yao.jl, QuTiP, stim, mitiq, to name a few. So, if possible, I would like to stick to Gabs.

[goerz]

I feel like @apkille already expressed their thoughts: They’d prefer Gabs if there is a maintainer willing to merge it, or otherwise would rename to something that passes the automatic checks