3 ms·
In the former each project is a self contained unit and if I'm working on project B I can forget project A even exists, which is lovely caused I've got enough t
by flukus 8y ago
In the former each project is a self contained unit and if I'm working on project B I can forget project A even exists, which is lovely caused I've got enough to deal with on B as is. Each project can be branched individually, the log of project B is not polluted with commits to project A, I can rebase and not get a bunch of commits I don't care about.
The later forces me to be aware of the entire universe in that repo.
- Too 8y agoIn the later you can also forget project A exist. git log works in subdirectories out of the box and if you didn't touch any files in project A a rebase will be trivial without any merge conflicts. Branching is also free (unless you are still in the SVN stoneage that requires a copy of each file) so it doesn't matter if you branch the whole monorepo or just a single project.
- wcoenen 8y ago> unless you are still in the SVN stoneage that requires a copy of each file Maybe you are thinking of CVS? In SVN, creating branches has always been cheap in both space and time.