Hi Ernesto, thanks for your feedback! On 6/25/19 7:49 PM, Ernesto Puerta wrote: > Interesting debate you brought up here, Lenz! Wouldn't want to divert > from the original question, but... > > The interesting thing is that, as the paper says, BECAUSE of that > monolithic approach Google couldn't keep on using P4 (as it no longer > scaled enough) and had to build their own VCS. Because they can :) I personally think that git still scales quite well for a project of the size of Ceph (in terms of contributors and code base). > Besides, P4 (not sure if Piper follows the same approach) made really > easy to setup up workspaces with cherry-picked dirs to sync (instead > of whole repo clones). So IMHO the debate should not be only about > mono-repo vs. multi-repos, but centralized mono-repo vs DVCS > multi-repos. But that would likely require more drastic changes, wouldn't it? > In my experience this is also about the practices & cultures > allowed/fostered by mono-repo vs. multi-repo ecosystems: > - code, dirs & files vs. architecture, modules & interfaces > - atomic (backward-breaking) changes vs. extending functionality while > honoring APIs > - code sharing/reuse/ownership vs. functionality sharing/reuse/ownership * > - grep vs. documentation > - #include dependency management vs. declarative dep. mgmt > - build everything vs. delta builds > - E2E testing vs. integration testing > - 1 tool for everything (VCS) vs. pipelines (VCS, CI, artifact/release > management, CD, etc.) > > * mono-repos make really hard to share/spread code beyond the repo, > > BTW, here's (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W71BTkUbdqE) a recorded > talk about that paper, and it contains a few 'gems' ("Google solves > dependencies by statically linking everything", "can do massive > backward-incompatible changes... atomically"). Thanks for sharing your insights! I guess we would have to start with collecting current pain points and concerns and then figure out if any of these approaches would help to alleviate them. In my case, I outlined the reasons for my proposal in my initial message. Having worked on openATTIC as an independent project before, we really enjoy working on the dashboard as a "built-in" component. Less surprises... Lenz -- SUSE Linux GmbH - Maxfeldstr. 5 - 90409 Nuernberg (Germany) GF: Felix Imendörffer, Mary Higgins, Sri Rasiah HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Dev mailing list -- dev@xxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave@xxxxxxx
