I really wish the Julia ecosystem would stop assuming that you always interact with your computer through the Julia REPL and started supporting proper command line interfaces. This is one of the big annoyances and mistakes of the R ecosystem, and I think it's unwise to carry that mistake over to Julia.

Also, big "ugh" to browser-based tooling. I want to browse webpages in my browser, I don't want to do my data science work there. We don't even have a good native client for Jupyter notebooks yet, let alone for this new Jupyter alternative that doesn't support the existing Jupyter kernel protocol.

Not only that, but Pluto also apparently has some obnoxious UX limitations that remind me of other less-than-usable wannabe-Jupyter-notebooks (e.g. Apache Zeppelin, Databricks): https://towardsdatascience.com/could-pluto-be-a-real-jupyter...

In short: nice idea, but I'd rather see continued unification around Jupyter and a proper IDE that can at least emit and interact with Jupyter-compatible data.

On the other hand, the Jupyter notebook JSON format is bad for a variety of reasons (e.g. you need special tools for readable Git diffs) and I really wish we had all settled on R Markdown instead. But R has its own NIH tooling problem and nobody was ever going to adopt it because the R community itself (driven by RStudio) has little interest in sharing or interoperability with other languages.

> I really wish the Julia ecosystem would stop assuming that you always interact with your computer through the Julia REPL and started supporting proper command line interfaces.

What does it even mean? What is a CLI interface for a programming language if not a REPL ?

I also do not really get the complaint, but it is along the lines of people wanting to write `julia-pkg install Pluto` instead of `julia -e 'using Pkg; Pkg.add("Pluto")'`. It seems it is a big pet peeve for some people.

Check out https://github.com/fredrikekre/jlpkg. It does pretty much exactly what you are describing.