4 ms·
The right way to write this kind of content is like Digital Ocean did: https://blog.digitalocean.com/cthulhu-organizing-go-code-in-a-scalable-repo/ https://blog
by nwhatt 8y ago
The right way to write this kind of content is like Digital Ocean did: https://blog.digitalocean.com/cthulhu-organizing-go-code-in-a-scalable-repo/ https://blog.digitalocean.com/cthulhu-organizing-go-code-in-...
Rather than these back and forth about the theoretical implications of a monorepo, actual stories of implementing one are 10x more useful to me.
- aidenn0 8y agoI think there is a balance. It's always possible to argue that DO would have done better or worse with a polyrepo. However if you ignore evidence, then the theoretical arguments can get silly very quickly.
- mlthoughts2018 8y agoAnother problem is confusing causal effects from confounders. Did a monorepo cause success, or did they succeed in spite of a monorepo. Studying individual cases for which there could never have been a counterfactual outcome (e.g. FB or Google) literally cannot provide evidence of a causal effect.
- aidenn0 8y agoThat's essentially what I was saying. We have evidence that it is possible to be successful with both a monorepo and a polyrepo setup, which is perhaps uninteresting other than to contradict people saying that either setup is guaranteed to be an unmitigated disaster. We also, however, have subjective feedback from people working on those teams as to how they think it would have been different. It's not rigorous data, but it shouldn't be altogether ignored either, particularly since rigorous data is so hard to come by.