Scope of `micropython-lib`

Hi there!

This is more of a discussion thread, not an issue. I'm coming in quite fresh, so I do apologise for where my knowledge isn't up-to-scratch.

TL;DR: Is micropython-lib aiming at becoming the PyPi of Micropython?

@BrianPugh and I have been discussing the adoption use of package managers and the different indexes that exist (e.g. like PyPi). One issue that exists within the micropython ecosystem is that there is no primary index, where packages can be downloaded from. And I guess micropython-lib is trying to bridge that gap, which I think is great.

User contributions

One question I have is whether the micropython-lib will be open to user contributions like PyPi? This would go a long way towards minimizing the need to install custom firmware (e.g. pimoroni-pico), if Pimoroni (and everyone else) could submit their libraries.

Board specification

An additional concern of the current state-of-affairs is package versioning, which could also be resolved with a package manager. However, this of course needs to be baked into the index as well. Is it, and if yes, how is it implemented in micropython-lib? And is there a way of choosing compatible boards, e.g. can you state compatible boards in package.json?

I hope this is something we can discuss, as I believe having a more complete, accessible index will make micropython as versatile as Python currently is.

Start by reviewing the current micropython-lib scope and the package.json metadata mentioned in the thread. Compare that state with the questions about user contributions, package versioning, and board compatibility. Done means the project’s intended scope and supported metadata are decided and documented.