> Keeping things in separate source databases with explicit interfaces is a well understood way of reducing the chances of ending up with a ball of mud. I don'

> Keeping things in separate source databases with explicit interfaces is a well understood way of reducing the chances of ending up with a ball of mud. I don't think this invalidates the thrust of your point, and I don't necessarily subscribe to the concept of monorepos, but Google is a monorepo, so senior engineers are definitely signing off on this sort of thing. Is it a ball of mud though? Actually does seem true more and more as time goes on. Probably the biggest difference is that well-disciplined engineers utilizing monorepo do sustain those well-defined interfaces. The example of systemd-logind having no interface guarantees (cited in the linked article) is a sign of trouble.