Hi Zach,
But I agree that library quality / support are important parts of library discovery: if you don't know which ones are generally thought of as good, or which ones have an active support network, how can you ever choose between them? Solving the library discovery problem is probably rather people-intensive, which I imagine is why nobody's done it. I'm told other languages suffer from this too.
I think quickdocs.org helps. I would also like to see some mechanism for incorporating user feedback (e.g. "I tried this library on LispWorks and it keeps crashing" or "The documentation doesn't match the code any more" or "This is great, it solved my problem and it's really fast") and rating. Building such a thing would take a generous expenditure of time and effort, so I understand why it hasn't popped into existence already.
Do you also see a role for cl-test-grid here, which tests quicklisp packaged libraries on a large number of platforms and may thus provide potential users with the insights they need for their platforms?
Bye,
Erik.