Debian Git Monorepo

#1

Post by pabs3 » Tue, Apr 02, 2024, 9:16 AM UTC

Re: Debian Git Monorepo

#2

Post by dijit » Tue, Apr 02, 2024, 9:36 AM UTC

I was always surprised that Perforce didn't have anything for open source, Git is basically eating their lunch because monorepo's suck so much with git; so people do things in a more fragmented and git-friendly way.

Not that I really want to see a proprietary product succeed, but it's somewhat surprising that:

A) We don't have anything better

B) Perforce isn't trying to gain adoption by giving its software for free to distro maintainers

C) People keep coming up with different paradigms that attempt to solve problems monorepos solve inherently.

Re: Debian Git Monorepo

#3

Post by nolist_policy » Tue, Apr 02, 2024, 9:36 AM UTC

April fool aside, what I really want is a Debian git monorepo of submodules, where each submodule points to the upstream git repository.

Re: Debian Git Monorepo

#4

Post by ctrw » Tue, Apr 02, 2024, 9:38 AM UTC

I wish that half the executive initiatives I've seen ended the same way as this post.

Re: Debian Git Monorepo

#5

Post by maccard » Tue, Apr 02, 2024, 9:42 AM UTC

dijit wrote: post #2

I was always surprised that Perforce didn't have anything for open source, Git is basically eating their lunch because monorepo's suck so much with git; so people do things in a more fragmented and git-friendly way. Not that I really want to see a proprietary product succeed, but it's somewhat surprising that: A) We don't have anything better B) Perforce isn't trying to gain adoption by giving its software for free t…

Perforce doesn't need to because nothing really threatens it. They're not interested in becoming more known, because they don't need to be.

I can't imagine Debian of all projects using a proprietary VCS though.

Re: Debian Git Monorepo

#6

Post by netol » Tue, Apr 02, 2024, 9:53 AM UTC

I wonder how many xz-like backdoors could be in there.

Re: Debian Git Monorepo

#7

Post by G3rn0ti » Tue, Apr 02, 2024, 9:58 AM UTC

I know it‘s an April‘s fool. But I don’t get this recent trend of people arguing in favor of a monorepo (at my work place, too). It’s a nightmare to handle and use. What gives?

Re: Debian Git Monorepo

#8

Post by frizlab » Tue, Apr 02, 2024, 10:00 AM UTC

G3rn0ti wrote: post #7

I know it‘s an April‘s fool. But I don’t get this recent trend of people arguing in favor of a monorepo (at my work place, too). It’s a nightmare to handle and use. What gives?

Glad to see I’m not the only one thinking that.

Re: Debian Git Monorepo

#9

Post by paulgdp » Tue, Apr 02, 2024, 10:04 AM UTC

G3rn0ti wrote: post #7

I know it‘s an April‘s fool. But I don’t get this recent trend of people arguing in favor of a monorepo (at my work place, too). It’s a nightmare to handle and use. What gives?

NixOS uses a monorepo and I think everyone loves it.

I love being able to easily grep through all the packages source code, and there's regularly PRs that harmonizes conventions across many packages.

Nixpkgs doesn't include the packaged software source code, so it's a lot more practical than what Debian is doing.

Creating a whole distribution often requires changes synchronized across many packages, so it really makes things simpler.

https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs

I think it's important to add that they both have the biggest number of packaged software and the most up-to-date software of all distributions even though they have far fewer maintainers than Debian.

https://repology.org/repositories/graphs

Re: Debian Git Monorepo

#10

Post by andyferris » Tue, Apr 02, 2024, 10:04 AM UTC

G3rn0ti wrote: post #7

I know it‘s an April‘s fool. But I don’t get this recent trend of people arguing in favor of a monorepo (at my work place, too). It’s a nightmare to handle and use. What gives?

It probably depends on your project size, but I am one of those that find them easier to handle.

What do you find nightmarish?