3 ms·

Twitter: Monorepo Facebook: Monorepo Google: Monorepo Amazon: Multirepo Of these companies, compare AWS and the number of services, new features and quic

• rriepe 6y ago
  I dunno, those just seem like the sane choices for those four. Twitter, Facebook and Google are closer to being "one big app" than Amazon. Google is probably the only one on the fence, and yeah they are suffering in the way you suggest.
• dastbe 6y ago
  What makes Amazon's multirepo setup "tick" isn't the multirepos themselves but the coordination mechanisms around it (version sets, brazil, and pipelines). whereas bazel/buck are open source and work ok enough to scale monorepos, i dont think there are the equivalent tools out there for multirepo and it shows in the comments for people with multirepo pain. EDIT: that being said, I do think multirepo is better, but only when you have the above tools to manage it.
  • qznc 6y ago
    After some search I found this description, which seems to explain brazil and version sets: https://gist.github.com/terabyte/15a2d3d407285b8b5a0a7964dd6283b0 https://gist.github.com/terabyte/15a2d3d407285b8b5a0a7964dd6...
  • influx 6y ago
    Agreed that Amazon build and deploy is vastly ahead of bazel/buck. That said, git just works so much faster on a smaller repo. There's significant overhead trying to use git or hg on a huge monorepo that really takes a toll on development.