Jeena@piefed.jeena.net to Programming@programming.devEnglish · 2 days agoAre monorepos really simpler?www.youtube.comexternal-linkmessage-square26fedilinkarrow-up176
arrow-up176external-linkAre monorepos really simpler?www.youtube.comJeena@piefed.jeena.net to Programming@programming.devEnglish · 2 days agomessage-square26fedilink
minus-squaremajster@lemmy.ziplinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up10·2 days agoAgree with this explanation. Also in a monorepo it’s much easier to reference code between modules and I think this leads to too much coupled code. It takes more discipline to limit the scope of modules.
minus-squarePup Biru@aussie.zonelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·edit-210 hours agothat’s a good and bad thing though… it’s easy to reference code, so it leads to tight coupling it’s easy to reference code, so let’s pull this out into a separately testable, well-documented, reusable library my main reason for ever using a monorepo is to separate out a bunch of shared libraries into real libraries, and still be able to have eg HMR
Agree with this explanation. Also in a monorepo it’s much easier to reference code between modules and I think this leads to too much coupled code. It takes more discipline to limit the scope of modules.
that’s a good and bad thing though…
it’s easy to reference code, so it leads to tight coupling
it’s easy to reference code, so let’s pull this out into a separately testable, well-documented, reusable library
my main reason for ever using a monorepo is to separate out a bunch of shared libraries into real libraries, and still be able to have eg HMR