Added library list that support ReactiveCocoa

[Legoless]

A couple of libraries already support ReactiveCocoa and for others there are a couple of extensions available. This pull request adds a list of libraries that I could find open source online.

[jspahrsummers]

As discussed in #1113, we'd only be interested in listing or “endorsing” libraries for which we've vetted the code quality. That's not to say that anything in this list wouldn't meet that standard, but without @ReactiveCocoa/reactivecocoa collaborators spending the time to investigate, it's hard to say.

@kastiglione You expressed interest in helping out with this sort of thing, but that was almost a year ago now. Would you still be up for it?

[Legoless]

Understood, I can have a look as well. For starters, we could filter out those that are missing the Pods and that were not updated in last year or so. For standards, is there any document I could refer to?

[jspahrsummers]

Sorry, no. It's not just code style that we're interested in, but higher-level architectural patterns and “soundness,” which is why I would really like ReactiveCocoa collaborators to be involved.

[Legoless]

Okay, cool. Let me know if there is anything I can do.

[kastiglione]

I'll try to take a look. What are the thoughts of coverage completeness, for those libraries that are strictly wrappers? Do we care if they don't cover the full API, or do we only care that the parts that are covered, are covered fairly idiomatically?

[jspahrsummers]

Do we care if they don't cover the full API, or do we only care that the parts that are covered, are covered fairly idiomatically?

I don't mind not wrapping the full API. It should absolutely be idiomatic, though.

[kastiglione]

✖️ Non-idiomatic.

[Legoless]

So should we update this and remove libraries? But if you are going to keep very strict rules about this, is almost pointless to have any list at all. I would suggest rather to put disclaimer or warnings near wrappers and only remove critical or really low quality ones.

[robb]

👎 on the list, seems like the time could be better spent elsewhere and would incentivize people to get their name on the list for fake internet points.

[ashfurrow]

All internet points are fake, @robb :P

[Legoless]

I agree with @ashfurrow this is by no way meant to improve anyone's reputation. I did not even include any names. I just thought it was a nice addition to have this somewhere, it would definitely help me and probably some other developers as well. I understand all your points, so feel free to reject this, I just didn't think it would hurt anyone if this was in the main repo. :)

[ashfurrow]

I think having a list of example uses of ReactiveCocoa would be a great help to beginners. I know the (few) that were available when I was learning were very helpful.

[kastiglione]

very strict rules about this, is almost pointless to have any list at all.

@Legoless Other than for "completeness" what value is there in listing libraries that we have to warn against?

[kastiglione]

I'm with @ashfurrow. If we can have resources to learn from, that's good. If "fake points" encourage "real" quality, that's fucking great trade off! 😄

[ashfurrow]

@kastiglione I wish I could favourite GH comments.

[kastiglione]

Me too. Where can we find a GitHubber with pull around here. 🌟

[robrix]

👎 to playing favourites with comments. All of your comments are equally beautiful ❤️

[Legoless]

@kastiglione Well, on the other side, if for nothing else, at least us beginners could learn how not to do things. ;)

[RuiAAPeres]

I think it would be useful and educational to layout some tips/patterns/recommendations when creating a wrapper.