4 ms·
As a committed monorepo opponent, that's not why. "Why" is that it's not possible for a monorepo to have meaningful history. If you don't want to have meaningfu
by juped 6y ago
As a committed monorepo opponent, that's not why. "Why" is that it's not possible for a monorepo to have meaningful history. If you don't want to have meaningful history, you're crippling yourself, but you also shouldn't use Git; there are better tools for version control with bad history.
- jeffbee 6y agoAh so I guess it's "not possible" that Google has a meaningful history of their source code and I guess their project, arguably among largest and most profitable of all time, is "crippled". Weird. I wonder how they get anything done over there.
- juped 6y agoGoogle is very unimpressive; the only way I can think of in which they are even tangentially associated with good engineering practices is, well, employing Junio Hamano to, basically, curate the meaningful history of Git.