npm, yarn, vs pnpm

Introduction

Package managers are essential tools for managing dependencies and packages in software projects. Below is a comparison of npm, the most widely used JavaScript package manager, with other popular package managers like Yarn and pnpm.

1. npm (Node Package Manager)

• Developer: Maintained by npm, Inc., a subsidiary of GitHub.
• Default with Node.js: Automatically installed with Node.js.
• Pros:
  • Wide Adoption: It’s the default package manager for Node.js, making it the most widely adopted.
  • Large Ecosystem: Has the largest registry of packages available for JavaScript.
  • Improved Performance: npm v7 and above introduced features like workspaces and automatic peer dependency installation, improving its performance and feature set.
  • Security Audits: Built-in support for auditing packages for vulnerabilities (npm audit).
• Cons:
  • Performance Issues (Historically): Earlier versions were slower compared to other package managers, although npm v7 and later have improved performance.
  • Peer Dependencies Handling: Before npm v7, managing peer dependencies could be tricky.
• Unique Features:
  • npm Workspaces: A feature for managing multiple packages within a monorepo.
  • Automatic Peer Dependencies: Automatically installs peer dependencies with npm v7+.

2. Yarn

• Developer: Originally developed by Facebook.
• Key Advantages:
  • Speed: Yarn v1 was significantly faster than early versions of npm, thanks to its caching mechanism and parallel installation.
  • Deterministic Installs: Uses a yarn.lock file to ensure consistent installs across different environments.
  • Workspaces: Built-in support for monorepos, making it easy to manage multiple related packages.
  • Security: Checks package checksums to verify the integrity of packages.
• Drawbacks:
  • Complexity: Yarn introduced a new workflow that might have a learning curve for developers used to npm.
  • Additional Installation: Unlike npm, Yarn needs to be installed separately.
• Yarn 2 (Berry):
  • Introduced Plug’n’Play (PnP) which eliminates the node_modules folder, providing faster installs and better disk space usage.
  • Migration Challenges: Upgrading from Yarn v1 to Yarn v2 (Berry) can be non-trivial due to major architectural changes.

3. pnpm (Performant npm)

• Developer: Community-driven.
• Pros:
  • Efficiency: Uses a unique symlink strategy that prevents duplication of files, resulting in less disk space usage compared to npm and Yarn.
  • Speed: Very fast due to its lightweight installation method and efficient handling of node_modules.
  • Strict Mode: Ensures that packages use only dependencies they list in their own package.json, reducing potential issues from hoisted dependencies.
  • Workspaces: Full support for monorepos with powerful workspace management.
• Cons:
  • Adoption: Less widely adopted compared to npm and Yarn, which might affect the availability of community support and documentation.
  • Compatibility: Might require additional configuration or adaptation in some CI/CD environments.
• Unique Features:
  • pnpm’s Symlinked Structure: Avoids deep node_modules trees, improving performance and avoiding issues related to path length on certain file systems.

Feature Comparison Table

When to Choose Each Package Manager

• Choose npm if:

  • You prefer the most standard and widely supported tool.
  • You want built-in support and direct integration with Node.js.

• Choose Yarn if:

  • You need a reliable tool for monorepos (especially if using v1).
  • You value speed and deterministic installs.
  • You are okay with trying new features like Plug’n’Play.

• Choose pnpm if:

  • You want the most efficient disk space usage and performance.
  • You’re working on a project with a lot of shared dependencies.
  • You prefer strict dependency resolution rules.

Each package manager has its strengths and weaknesses, so the choice often depends on your specific project needs and preferences.