3 ms·

Oddly enough, you could s/mono/multi in your post and that would exactly align with my own experience. I'm not kidding: everything from engendering reliance on

by zeveb 8y ago

Oddly enough, you could s/mono/multi in your post and that would exactly align with my own experience. I'm not kidding: everything from engendering reliance on weird homegrown tooling, CI & build pipelines to the pain of trying to break out to a different approach, to enforced bad practices, to developers (unknowingly) misleading management, to colossal failures. I've worked on teams with monorepos and teams with multiple repos, and so far my experience has been that monorepo development has been better — so much so that I feel (but do not believe) that advocating multiple repositories is professional malpractice. Why don't I believe that? Because I know that the world is a big place, and that I've only worked at a few places out of the many that exist, and my experience only reflects my experience. So I don't really believe that multiple repositories are malpractice: my emotions no doubt mislead me here. I suspect that what you & I have seen is not actually dependent on number of repositories, but rather due to some other factor, perhaps team leadership.

mlthoughts2018 8y ago
Everyone always says this type of response about everything though. If you like X, you’ll say, “In my experience you can /s/X/Y and all the criticisms of X are even more damning criticisms of Y!” All I can say is I’ve had radically the opposite experience across many jobs. All the places that used monorepos had horrible cultures, constant CI / CD fire drills and inability to innovate, to such severe degrees that it caused serious business failures. Companies with polyrepos did not have magical solutions to every problem, they just did not have to deal with whole classes of problems tied to monorepos, particularly on the side of stalled innovation and central IT dictatorships. Meanwhile, polyrepos did not introduce any serious different classes of problems that a monorepo would have solved more easily.

by zeveb 8y ago

mlthoughts2018 8y ago

Everyone always says this type of response about everything though. If you like X, you’ll say, “In my experience you can /s/X/Y and all the criticisms of X are even more damning criticisms of Y!” All I can say is I’ve had radically the opposite experience across many jobs. All the places that used monorepos had horrible cultures, constant CI / CD fire drills and inability to innovate, to such severe degrees that it caused serious business failures. Companies with polyrepos did not have magical solutions to every problem, they just did not have to deal with whole classes of problems tied to monorepos, particularly on the side of stalled innovation and central IT dictatorships. Meanwhile, polyrepos did not introduce any serious different classes of problems that a monorepo would have solved more easily.