# Would it be worth creating a "JuliaTelecom" Julia group?

**URL:** <https://discourse.julialang.org/t/would-it-be-worth-creating-a-juliatelecom-julia-group/26798>\
**Category:** Community\
**Created:** [July 25, 2019, 3:37pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/would-it-be-worth-creating-a-juliatelecom-julia-group/26798 "2019-07-25T15:37:01Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 18

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![MA\_Laforge](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/ma_laforge/32/385_2.png) [@MA\_Laforge](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/MA_Laforge)\
**Post date:** [September 21, 2019, 8:38pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/would-it-be-worth-creating-a-juliatelecom-julia-group/26798/18 "2019-09-21T20:38:50Z")

</div>

Though I do agree that we do tend to call the field “communications” - and that most people are familiar with the “Communications” toolbox, my concern was not to confuse my group with other potential Julia groups. I mention this in one of my comments below:

> [@\[ANN\] DigitalComm.jl - Tools and utilities for digital communication](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/ann-digitalcomm-jl-tools-and-utilities-for-digital-communication/25595/4):
>
> This is unfortunate: I had searched as much as I could to find a package like this one in the package registry and on Julia Observer. I just registered a package called PhysicalCommunications.jl a few days ago: → [https://github.com/ma-laforge/PhysicalCommunications.jl](https://github.com/ma-laforge/PhysicalCommunications.jl) DigitalComm.jl might have been a good home for my eye-diagram & Maximum LFSR algorithms. Note: I called my module “PhysicalCommunications” simply because I was providing “Analog” tools (eye-diagram) for observing channel quali…

And since I see Julia being adopted in so many fields, I could even see someone wanting to build a “Communications” toolbox for those who work as journalists, media editors, PR practitioners, staff writers, etc.

But even in more restricted terms, I personally feel that collecting all tools relating to the 7 OSI layers in a single Julia group would be a bit excessive… Though I am definitely open to hearing what others think on this subject.

Anyways, despite my reluctance to do so, I named my own package “PhysicalCommunications.jl” just because I mostly tend to work in the physical communication layer, myself.

And, for the record, I am not a particularly big fan of calling the group “JuliaTelecom” either - so I am all in to picking a better name/scope for this group.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/would-it-be-worth-creating-a-juliatelecom-julia-group/26798)._