Allowing dependencies to be namespaced under organizations would be useful to avoid any name conflicts that might arise in the future and make it obvious that two packages are related.
Doing this in the registry is easy but deciding how it would work in terms of dependencies requires some tribulation:
The same style of dependencies would be fine, probably
"dependencies": {
"@lpm/fs": { "path": "1.0.0" }
}But now how do you use this? Will it just become require("fs")? Maybe require("@lpm.fs") ?
The second is more explicit but becomes difficult, need to special case the dependencies to allow for some to be stored in this weird subdirectory way. It also doesn't look fantastic.
Maybe require("lpm@fs") ? Would kind of solve both issues, but it still doesn't look fantastic. Can't use a colon as that's restricted on windows (as I learned trying to make lpm:test in place of the current lpm-test
Allowing dependencies to be namespaced under organizations would be useful to avoid any name conflicts that might arise in the future and make it obvious that two packages are related.
Doing this in the registry is easy but deciding how it would work in terms of dependencies requires some tribulation:
The same style of dependencies would be fine, probably
But now how do you use this? Will it just become
require("fs")? Mayberequire("@lpm.fs")?The second is more explicit but becomes difficult, need to special case the dependencies to allow for some to be stored in this weird subdirectory way. It also doesn't look fantastic.
Maybe
require("lpm@fs")? Would kind of solve both issues, but it still doesn't look fantastic. Can't use a colon as that's restricted on windows (as I learned trying to makelpm:testin place of the currentlpm-test