Trouble importing meshtastic with node

[gtnoble]

I have installed meshtasticjs using npm and there were no errors.
When I tried to import in node v16.17.0 using this line:
import { IHTTPConnection } from "@meshtastic/meshtasticjs";
I get an error:
Error [ERR_MODULE_NOT_FOUND]: Cannot find module '/home/gtnoble/Documents/Projects/meshtastic-test/node_modules/@meshtastic/meshtasticjs/dist/generated/module_config' imported from /home/gtnoble/Documents/Projects/meshtastic-test/node_modules/@meshtastic/meshtasticjs/dist/generated/mesh.js at new NodeError (node:internal/errors:387:5) at finalizeResolution (node:internal/modules/esm/resolve:429:11) at moduleResolve (node:internal/modules/esm/resolve:1006:10) at defaultResolve (node:internal/modules/esm/resolve:1214:11) at nextResolve (node:internal/modules/esm/loader:165:28) at ESMLoader.resolve (node:internal/modules/esm/loader:844:30) at ESMLoader.getModuleJob (node:internal/modules/esm/loader:431:18) at ModuleWrap.<anonymous> (node:internal/modules/esm/module_job:76:40) at link (node:internal/modules/esm/module_job:75:36) { code: 'ERR_MODULE_NOT_FOUND' }
This could be a mistake on my part, but I thought I would reach out in case it was a deeper problem.

[gtnoble]

I'm not an expert on this, but it looks like the generated files are not adding the .js extension to the relative imports.

[gtnoble]

running node with the option --experimental-specifier-resolution=node seems to be a quick fix for this issue. I suppose in the long run it would be best for the protobuf-ts code generator be modified to generate the proper extensions.

[sachaw]

Yeah, as you've observed, this is the undesirable behavior exhibited by protobuf-ts, I've opened an issue about it before but the developer did not want to invest time into the feature, he was open to PR's though.

[ajmcquilkin]

How does the web client get around this issue when consuming this package? I'm trying to import the JS library in Electron and I'm getting the same error. To my knowledge I'm not able to perform the --experimental-specifier-resolution=node fix.

[sachaw]

There's an open PR, I might fork the project and sort this out tonight
timostamm/protobuf-ts#233

[ajmcquilkin]

Sounds good! Happy to help with this if at all possible, this issue is a current blocker for me

[sachaw]

I'm contemplating switching to https://pbkit.dev/ a much more maintainable project, Although I prefer the code generated by protobuf-ts, the project is in shambles and not moving to ESM

[ajmcquilkin]

Interesting, I'll take a look at that. What kind of refactoring would this require?

[ajmcquilkin]

Also looks like this uses Deno. Would there be the possibility for issues running this on Node-based projects?

Edit: the maintainers claim it runs in Node.js or browser here

[sachaw]

Yeah, so the pbkit project is made for deno but:
They distribute it for node: https://www.npmjs.com/package/pbkit
I would like to make this package Deno native in the future with support for node.

[sachaw]

Issue that I'm talking with the devs about right now is distributing the pb binary, as we currently use protoc that is handled by https://www.npmjs.com/package/node-protoc
however I'm not sure of the best way forwards, without making each user manually install this on there system.

[ajmcquilkin]

Interesting, is there no package for the pb binary? Alternatively, is there a situation in which the pb binary is only used in development and doesn't need to be distributed through the package?

[sachaw]

Yeah that's correct, so it's not a massive issue, it's just nice to have it work out of the box for devs

[sachaw]

There will be a few things that are different, string union's instead of enums, imports will be seperated by message not file anymore and a few more

[ajmcquilkin]

Gotcha, so there will have to be some internal rewrites in that case. Would this require API changes and/or a breaking version change?