Dependency Managers

There are two solutions to dependency management where each has a different 'target audience' per say:

The community needs both solutions for reasons that will be explained later.

Each one will be further explained in its own file. However, one can refer to each with a "crude name" that summarizes them:

Dependency Managers Compared

This side-by-side comparison should be thought of as an "apples to oranges" comparison.

	Bower	Spago
Ideal User	Library Developers People exploring the language/ecosystem	Application Developers People learning the language via a CI-proven learning material
Official/Unofficial	Official (parts of the PureScript compiler depend on it)	Unofficial
Trajectory	Moving away?	Moving towards?
Design Goals	?	See this summary of a project that later "evolved" into Spago
Pros	Bower is required for one to publish a library's docs to Pursuit Bower caches its dependencies, so you can download a version of a package only once and use it everywhere on your system It's the "official" dependency manager for Purescript	One never experiences the aforementioned "transitive dependency conflicts" Uses Git to work, which is usually already installed on all systems Reliably produces reproducible Purescript dependencies Reduces verbosity somewhat by omitting the `purescript-` prefix on PureScript packages
Cons	When a recent compiler release has been made, one will encounter the 'transitive dependency' issue above quite frequently until all the libraries in the ecosystem are updated to the new release. Figuring out which version of a package works with another wastes a lot of time. Uses node to work, which may not be installed on all systems Doesn't always produce reproducible dependencies due to its caching feature.	One cannot publish a library's docs to Pursuit. Uses more storage space due to duplicating code when one has multiple projects across their system.