fix: correctly parse package name for scoped packages

[gameroman]

🔗 Linked issue

Fixes #2141

📚 Description

Fixes fetching data on compare page with scoped packages

Before

After

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
npmx.dev	Ready	Preview, Comment	Mar 18, 2026 7:16pm

2 Skipped Deployments

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
docs.npmx.dev	Ignored	Preview	Mar 18, 2026 7:16pm
npmx-lunaria	Ignored		Mar 18, 2026 7:16pm

[coderabbitai]

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

This pull request adds URI decoding to two API route handlers for package registry endpoints (analysis and install-size) by applying decodeURIComponent to the raw package name parameter before parsing. Additionally, it introduces unit tests for the parsePackageParams utility function, covering scenarios with unscoped and scoped packages both with and without versions. The changes ensure that encoded package names in route parameters are correctly decoded prior to validation and parsing.

Possibly related PRs

• fix: use consistent package parsing on social/likes #1180: Implements consistent package route parsing by decoding raw package route parameters and validating them, aligning with this PR's approach for the analysis and install-size endpoints.

Suggested labels

needs review

Suggested reviewers

• danielroe
• serhalp

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	The code changes decode URI-encoded package names in two API endpoints and add comprehensive unit tests for parsePackageParams, directly addressing the scoped package handling requirement from issue #1.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	All changes are focused on fixing scoped package name parsing: two API endpoint modifications and corresponding unit tests directly address the linked issue without introducing extraneous modifications.
Description check	✅ Passed	The pull request description clearly relates to the changeset, describing the fix for scoped package parsing on the compare page with visual before/after demonstrations.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests

📝 Coding Plan

• Generate coding plan for human review comments

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[coderabbitai]

🧹 Nitpick comments (2)

server/api/registry/analysis/[...pkg].get.ts (1)

38-46: Consider extracting route package-param parsing into a shared helper.

This block is now duplicated across endpoints; centralising it would lower future drift risk when parsing/decoding rules change.

test/unit/server/utils/parse-package-params.spec.ts (1)

4-53: Useful parser coverage; add one regression test for encoded route input.

These tests validate segment parsing well, but the bug fix is in handler decoding. Please add a handler-level test with %40scope%2Fname so the original regression is fully guarded.

As per coding guidelines **/*.{test,spec}.{ts,tsx}: Write unit tests for core functionality using vitest.

---

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: a276c004-28ce-491f-b50c-2f60a4d5f279

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 77c4570 and 2c0f0cb.

📒 Files selected for processing (3)

• server/api/registry/analysis/[...pkg].get.ts
• server/api/registry/install-size/[...pkg].get.ts
• test/unit/server/utils/parse-package-params.spec.ts

[MatteoGabriele]

@gameroman, could you provide a more detailed description of what this PR aims to fix? The issue you mentioned links to a ticket on your fork, and there are only two links. It's a bit cryptic, even for future reference, and it would be better documented/tracked in this repository.

[gameroman]

@gameroman, could you provide a more detailed description of what this PR aims to fix? The issue you mentioned links to a ticket on your fork, and there are only two links. It's a bit cryptic, even for future reference, and it would be better documented/tracked in this repository.

Updated

[MatteoGabriele]

Judging by the title, I expected to see some artifacts in the stats, but they look the same unless I'm missing something.

[gameroman]

Here is what it's like for me

Before:

https://main.npmx.dev/compare?packages=@angular/core,vue

After:

https://npmx-qljid94b8-npmx.vercel.app/compare?packages=@angular/core,vue

[MatteoGabriele]

@gameroman, where did you find this link? 🤔 https://npmx-qljid94b8-npmx.vercel.app/compare?packages=@angular/core,vue

[MatteoGabriele]

btw I like the addition. I was wondering if it wouldn't make sense to include it directly within the parsePackageParams utility and add tests for when the string is actually encoded? What do you think?