microsoft / microsoft/DefinitelyTyped-tools
Q: What would you expect from package managers?
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- TypeScript
- Stars
- 423
- Forks
- 237
- Avg merge
- 18h 18m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 11
Description
The @types packages (and particularly whether dependencies should be regular deps or peer deps, big subject) is a bit messy in terms of dependency graph. I was wondering if you had a rough idea what would the absolute best case look like, assuming an ideal world where perfect solutions exist.
For example, would it be peer dependencies everywhere? Regular deps everywhere? A bit of both? Unlisted dependencies? A separate dependency field that package managers would understand (typedDependencies or whatever)? No more @types package and .d.ts into every package? The package manager downloading the types without needing markup?
Even as a thought experiment I think it can be interesting to hear your opinion about "split ecosystems" such as what TypeScript users experience.
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reading issue #43 and its two comments, focusing on the questions about @types packages, dependency kinds, and package-manager support. The issue does not identify files, tests, or a concrete implementation target; it would need an agreed design and scope before a newcomer could define what done means.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- typescript
- Domain
- tooling
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 15/100