3 ms·
When you say it's "as much work" there's an assumption the code is still used. This was years ago, but when I was doing migrations at Google we sometimes had to
by skybrian 4y ago
When you say it's "as much work" there's an assumption the code is still used. This was years ago, but when I was doing migrations at Google we sometimes had to deal with abandoned or understaffed and barely maintained code. (Sometimes by deleting it, but it can be unclear whether code by some other team is still useful.)
If you're not responsible for fixing downstream dependencies then you don't need to spend any time figuring that out.
- dx034 4y agoSounds great to me because you are forced to delete code that's not in use anymore. Without the monorepo, that code would still be there with old libraries that are potentially insecure. Deleting code that is not being used anymore happens way too rarely in my opinion.
- rfoo 4y agoThe downside is if a product no longer have maintainers you are now encouraged to shut it down, even if it still works and it doesn't cost much to run.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- crubier 4y agoIf a product non longer has maintainers, it's probably because it's not worth it for the company. So it makes sense to delete it, from the company point of view.
- dx034 4y agoIn that case the product should still have maintainers. Even if only part-time, no software project should be completely unsupervised.