Is path mapping for "Resolve Dependencies as TypeScript Modules" really the best solution?

[ChristianUlbrich]

[...]

TypeScript's path mapping is the best solution.

How so? If you have a more elaborated (TM) file layout such as:

• components/services/* having modules like @scope/service1
• shared/runtime/*... having modules like `@scope/runtime1
• models/* ... having modules like @scope/model1
  You would need to add them (path mappings) explicitly, because a generic match like the one you propose only works, if all modules are having the same folder depth/layout.

This hinders scalability and it in general a path mapping does not allow to refactor the file layout, without modifying the path mapping.

I think, this is the wrong approach; lerna bootstrap is explicitly abstracting the file layout of your modules away by sym-linking them correctly. Thus enabling "preserveSymlinks": true in each individual module's tsconfig.json is to me the more flexible (and hence better) solution.

However I like your point of view, why you settled with the path mapping option. Care to elaborate?

[johannesschobel]

hey @ChristianUlbrich ,

i think, this may be a relic from the typescript 2.x times. TypeScript 3.x introduced the project references, which may be more appropriate in such scenarios..

how did you manage to solve your issue?!