It works, but my issue was that if you run with a specific install-strategy in an .npmrc, that doesn't seem to do anything different than usual. It appears that everything still gets hoisted.

The layouts you get between this PR and the pnpm one are the same; you get hoisted to the top no matter what, so I'm not sure what you're observing that's different/bad exactly.

My assumption was that pnpm creates a specific node_modules directory per package which ends up being "stricter". The two main things which that helps with is:

1. pnpm will not directly expose a package that an example relies on (like dotenv) to typechat itself
2. examples that don't explicitly depend on typechat will not be able to access it

Does pnpm not do that?

It may or may not do either because you're using the monorepo root as an actual package with dependencies. It's impossible for an example to not see axios, for example; it's there in the parent directory, and you can't fix that without using the more typical layout which moves everything into packages/* or something.

But, it is at least more unlikely that you'll accidentally use a package that hasn't been declared thanks to pnpm not linking anything but declared ones.

In this repo's case, I believe you will get an error if typechat is not listed even though it's a parent because pnpm doesn't (yet) automatically create self-links like npm/yarn do.