I want to start by expressing my appreciation for the incredible work Hugging Face has done for the open-source community. Your contributions have been invaluable, and Iβm grateful for the tools and resources you've provided.
Please take the following as constructive feedback. I wouldnβt have mentioned these points if you hadnβt asked, and I hope they can be seen as suggestions for further improvement.
Software quality: When I first started using transformers, I was thoroughly impressed. The basic "hello world" examples work wonderfully, making the initial experience smooth and enjoyable. However, nowadays I am am regularly diving deeper into the library, and I am regularly facing challenges such as long-time standing bugs, undocumented issues, lack of API documentation, and occasionally broken functionality. I am only guessing here, but I think the majority of these repos is written by research engineers or researchers, whose focus might be more on the methodological correctness (which is of course crucial as well). That said, it might be helpful to include someone who is stronger in software development and less knowledgeable in ML. This would be the first person to complain about "clean code" issues, and also would be the first to notice problems with the software.
Posts: Great feature! However, it could be enhanced by adding basic text formatting options. This would make posts more visually appealing and easier to read.
Papers: Restricting this to arXiv is too limiting. While I understand the rationale in terms of implementation effort, if the goal is to be the "Github of ML/AI," it might be worth considering support for at least the high-ranking conferences (or a subset thereof). In many cases, the conference version of a paper supersedes the arXiv version, and this restriction may inadvertently encourage the use of preprints over the finalized versions.
Again, these are just my personal pain points, and Iβm sharing them with the intention of helping Hugging Face continue to improve.