Interesting.<p>I have also seen other solutions which address this problem:<p>1. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;facebook&#x2F;fbjs" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;facebook&#x2F;fbjs</a>
library that Facebook uses in React: you have @providesModule annotations in modules, and you can write e.g. require(&#x27;myModule&#x27;) even if myModule.js is somewhere deep in directory hierarchy.<p>2. webpack configuration (e.g. you can write own loader to be able to make:
require(&#x27;somethingWeird&#x27;), or probably use resolve like in this article: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;medium.com&#x2F;@ericclemmons&#x2F;dogfooding-your-open-source-projects-9e6dc1e7d1c8#.3cl7ayf27" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;medium.com&#x2F;@ericclemmons&#x2F;dogfooding-your-open-source...</a><p>I mean, I don&#x27;t want to underestimate your project by writing that something similar existed. Quite the opposite. I think that you made library for solving important problem (resolving dependencies in nice manageable way). I am just agnostic about which solution is the best.<p>Although I hope that in future one solution will prevail (maybe yours, maybe webpack based, maybe @providesModule, or maybe this kind of functionality should belong to JavaScript language itself? Maybe ES8 or ES9 will have something like this?).<p>Because dependency management is too important for allowing to further fragmentation :)