Add custom collection page, linked from package page

[finestructure]

To do:

• add test
• check query performance

[finestructure]

Using the name to build the URL works fine but generates URLs like

http://localhost:8080/collections/SSWG%20Graduated

We could make the slug configurable in the custom-package-collections.json by adding another field but I've kept it simple for now:

    {
        "name": "SSWG Graduated",
        "description": "SSWG packages that are in 'graduated' state",
        "badge": "SSWG",
        "url": "https://raw.githubusercontent.com/finestructure/sswg-package-lists/refs/heads/main/graduated.json",
        "slug": "sswg-graduated" // or maybe "id": "sswg-graduated"
    },

[finestructure]

The query cost for CustomCollectionsController.query is ~13k, which is OK (plus we only run the query when the actual page is shown).

Limit  (cost=13491.68..13491.71 rows=10 width=3423) (actual time=69.997..70.002 rows=7 loops=1)

The additional query cost for the collections fetch in PackageController.GetRoute

            async let customCollections = customCollections(on: database, package: packageResult.package)

is minuscule cost-wise (~2) but of course brings some extra latency because the additional query needs to be run.

[daveverwer]

Just a couple of points of general feedback:

1. We’re using the term “collections” for these but we use “collections” for package collections elsewhere on the site. I don’t dislike the name, but do think it’s confusing as it stands. Off the top of my head, I could think of a couple of a couple of other terms that might work: “Package Suite” might work, “Package Group” is dull but might work, “Package Set” also might work.
2. There should probably be a package collection for them at some point, but even if each “collection” had a package collectionI don’t think it fixes the issue with the naming.
3. We should echo the description out under the title and make sure that markdown links are parsed in the description. I can see the SSWG wanting to link back to their page on Swift.org.
4. We should also add another paragraph under the description that explains what this is. Something like: “Package collections/suites/groups/sets are human-curated lists of packages controlled by groups affiliated with Swift.org. Find out more in the [launch blog post].”

[finestructure]

Regarding 1+2: I think of them exactly as package collections - it's a list of packages - and in fact I was planning to add the same package collection link we have on the author's page in a follow up :)

Re 4: We've done this a couple of times (link to launch posts) but I wonder if we should rather create a more "timeless" page explaining things than blog posts. We don't typically go back and update them when things change. With the .spi.yml we now have the SPIManifest documentation to link to but a simple documentation page (not DocC, just a markdown page) would be better than a blog post I think.

I'd suggest we leave that to a follow up where we create that page and add the link back from the list.

[daveverwer]

Apologies, I didn't realise I had left this unapproved.

Regarding 1+2: I think of them exactly as package collections - it's a list of packages - and in fact I was planning to add the same package collection link we have on the author's page in a follow up :)

I think that works 👍

Re 4: We've done this a couple of times (link to launch posts) but I wonder if we should rather create a more "timeless" page explaining things than blog posts. We don't typically go back and update them when things change. With the .spi.yml we now have the SPIManifest documentation to link to but a simple documentation page (not DocC, just a markdown page) would be better than a blog post I think.

I'm all in favour of this. We will want to do a blog post about this so I was just trying to reduce work, but we can do both.

[finestructure]

I've now added the package collection link + button to the collection page: