User Feedback

[npikall]

I have finally came around to test the package manager and have a few remarks to make. Maybe some of the following issues that I faced can be attributed to a User Error. I unfortunately am only able to report stuff that did not work for me.

• utpm ws add does not seem to be checking the already existing dependencies in the typst.toml file. When the same package has been added repeatedly it resulted in the following:

[tool.utpm]
dependencies = [
    '''"""'"pkg"'"""''',
    """'"pkg"'""",
    '"pkg"',
    "pkg",
]

• utpm pkg unlink was lacking the [y/n] prompt, aswell as namespace option
• utpm ws init seemed to panic when a typst.toml file was present
• utpm ws link lacks:
  • the option to put into a specific name space
  • copied entire directory without packaging the package
• Info messages were sometimes not too clear and the verbosity levels did not seem to work (-v is not boolean but requires a number)
• Not always clear how the format of the package string should be (@namespace/mypkg:0.1.0 or a less verbose version of that)

Hopefully these issues are not actually issues but my incompetence. None the less I hope this helps with future improvements.

[Thumuss]

utpm ws add does not seem to be checking the already existing dependencies in the typst.toml file. When the same package has been added repeatedly it resulted in the following

You are right, I'll take a look later!

utpm pkg unlink was lacking the [y/n] prompt, aswell as namespace option

The prompt is indeed missing but the namespace is working. unlink works like this :

• You put your input in your command, e.g utpm pkg unlink @local/yes
• it checks if your input is something like this : @namespace/package:version with version following semver
• if it's not matching, checking @namespace/package and if not @namespace
• When I have the right input (namespace or package or version), I'll delete your input : the namespace or the package or a specific version of your package
• Done!

I agree this is not clear enough and not really ergonomic.
I'll make a issue based on that

utpm ws link lacks:

• the option to put into a specific name space

Namespace is based on your typst.toml. If under the [tool.utpm] section there is a namespace value, it will use it :

// Load the manifest and determine the namespace.
let config = load_manifest!(&curr);
let namespace = Extra::from(config.tool).namespace.unwrap_or("local".into());

But I agree we can do better and let the user have this option!

• copied entire directory without packaging the package

I'm not sure to follow here

• Info messages were sometimes not too clear and the verbosity levels did not seem to work (-v is not boolean but requires a number)

Yes it lacks a lot on the documentation and clear errors :((
I'll create an issue base on that
And the verbosity levels are :

• error
• warn
• info $<--$ Default one
• debug
• trace
  To use it : utpm -v VERBOSE_LEVEL e.g : utpm -v trace

• Not always clear how the format of the package string should be (@namespace/mypkg:0.1.0 or a less verbose version of that)

I'm working on a less verbose version of that, it's not perfect and used everywhere but I'll comments on what occasion you need this or that!

---

Thank you for your feedback! I'll make adjustment and I'll use your feedback to make a better documentation for those who come after ! (Expedition 33: Clair obscure reference!!)

[npikall]

Thanks for the quick reply. I hope my feedback did not sound too harsh. Regarding your comment:

I'm not sure to follow here

I would like to use this package manager in the future to replace these scripts from the template. What I was missing when running utpm ws link was the lack of file selection. Apparently the command is copying the entire directory tree, while I was hoping that it would behave similarly to the scripts from the template, such that it would not copy the files that are being ignored like the .git directory for example.

I hope that clears it up a bit.

[ensko]

Hey @npikall, thanks for looking at the requirements of the package :) I didn't get to it the whole summer... (I still have a lot on my plate, sadly)

these are also the main issues I identified. the remaining big ones are

• packaging the files to a different location than where packages get installed (to prepare a release, although publish is supposed to (at some point?) cover that)
• get metadata (e.g. package name, version) from typst.toml so they can be used in scripts

[Thumuss]

I'll use this issue for everyone who wants to put their feedback

[Thumuss]

* packaging the files to a different location than where packages get installed (to prepare a release, although `publish` is supposed to (at some point?) cover that)

We can currently already use that (more or less). I use env vars to get the dir you want to put, you can change that but that's not really usable as this stage since you only got control on the parent dir nor it's written anywhere. I made an issue about what @npikall said + you on #88

* get metadata (e.g. package name, version) from typst.toml so they can be used in scripts

I'll make an issue, that's a great idea!