5 ms·

Maybe this is a sign that monorepos are the problem?

• arxanas 5y ago
  Why would this indicate that monorepos are the problem?
  • chongli 5y ago
    It’s a philosophical conflict. Git was designed for distributed, decentralized version control and collaboration. Monorepos are inherently centralized. Thus git is the wrong tool for the job and all of this effort to adapt git to monorepo workflows runs counter to its philosophy.
    • arxanas 5y ago
      There are decentralized monorepos, such as gecko-dev (https://github.com/mozilla/gecko-dev https://github.com/mozilla/gecko-dev), which presumably has several forks in products like Iceweasel. I think the monorepo workflows which Git isn't good at are things like branching, code review, and feature/version management. But there's no reason that Git should have to be slow just because a repository is large. It's more things like "merge commits don't scale in a monorepo", which I would agree with, but that's not related to the performance of the index data structure.
    • status_quo69 5y ago
      I dunno, the linux kernel is pretty big and centralized by that definition, probably a monorepo by some definitions. I don't think this is a square peg round hole problem, I think that the operations that git must do coupled with the inevitable massive files that every company shoves into their repos (assets, binaries, you name it) makes git chug quite a bit.
    • smrq 5y ago
      I think you're conflating two different forms of "centralized". There is nothing inherently un-git about centralizing a bunch of code in a single repo; the decentralization that git is all about is that the repo state is decentralized across multiple machines.