search for: fpaqpyu_qim

...off commenting on this thread by the length, and the number of git discussions that have come before this. He convinced me to make the effort to put my 2 cents in though - thanks Chris. So - for my use-case I don't have strong feelings one way or the other* <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpaQpyU_QiM>. That said, something about the discussion so far strikes me as dissonant: If we're going to break out some sub-projects (the test-suite for licensing reasons, the runtimes for modularity) then it's not really a mono-repo any more. It's a multi-repo where we've collapsed some (b...

On 28 July 2016 at 22:12, Chris Bieneman <beanz at apple.com> wrote: > It is worth pointing out the Jenkins job that runs that is a playground I setup for myself. It is nowhere near production ready, and it will fail frequently as I iterate messing around with it. Sure, I think that's implied. cheers, --renato

...nting on this thread by the length, and the number of git discussions that have come before this. He convinced me to make the effort to put my 2 cents in though - thanks Chris. > > So - for my use-case I don't have strong feelings one way or the other* <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpaQpyU_QiM>. That said, something about the discussion so far strikes me as dissonant: If we're going to break out some sub-projects (the test-suite for licensing reasons, the runtimes for modularity) then it's not really a mono-repo any more. It's a multi-repo where we've collapsed some (b...

...thread by the > length, and the number of git discussions that have come before this. He > convinced me to make the effort to put my 2 cents in though - thanks Chris. > > So - for my use-case I don't have strong feelings one way or the other* > <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpaQpyU_QiM>. That said, something about > the discussion so far strikes me as dissonant: If we're going to break out > some sub-projects (the test-suite for licensing reasons, the runtimes for > modularity) then it's not really a mono-repo any more. It's a multi-repo > where we'...

...bout optimizing for a specific use-case, producing a clang based toolchain. But I really can not say without spending an hour or two reading the whole thread. Thanks, Michael > > So - for my use-case I don't have strong feelings one way or the other* <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpaQpyU_QiM>. That said, something about the discussion so far strikes me as dissonant: If we're going to break out some sub-projects (the test-suite for licensing reasons, the runtimes for modularity) then it's not really a mono-repo any more. It's a multi-repo where we've collapsed some (b...

...this thread by the length, and the number of git discussions that have come before this. He convinced me to make the effort to put my 2 cents in though - thanks Chris. >> >> So - for my use-case I don't have strong feelings one way or the other* <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpaQpyU_QiM>. That said, something about the discussion so far strikes me as dissonant: If we're going to break out some sub-projects (the test-suite for licensing reasons, the runtimes for modularity) then it's not really a mono-repo any more. It's a multi-repo where we've collapsed some (b...

Hi Duncan, > […] > 2. Those working on projects *outside* the monolithic repo will get the downsides of both: a monolithic repo that they are only using parts of, and multiple repos that are somehow version-locked. > > 3. For many (most?) developers, changing to a monolithic git repo is a *bigger* workflow change than switching to separate git repos. Many people (and at least some