Monorepo?

[Atila Neves]

On Monday, 6 February 2023 at 18:15:00 UTC, user1234 wrote:
> On Monday, 6 February 2023 at 17:56:33 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
>> On Monday, 6 February 2023 at 17:09:36 UTC, user1234 wrote:
>>> On Monday, 6 February 2023 at 10:22:32 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>
>>> This could lead to more breaking changes. Monorepo means that 
>>> only BuildKite will be able to detect them, **unless** it is 
>>> specified that it's not allowed to commit changes in phobos 
>>> just because required by a change in dmd/druntime.
>>>
>>> The need for this rule says it all.
>>
>> I don't understand, could you please explain how there'd be 
>> more breaking changes?
>
> I'll try to reword a bit:
>
> In case of an unexpected breaking change that would manifest 
> itself only in the Phobos test suite and not in the BuildKite 
> CI, and without "the rule", authors will be tempted to fix the 
> problem in phobos in the same PR as the one initially only 
> supposed to change DMD.
>
> As special rule is required, then why put phobos in the main D 
> repo ?
> The fact that a special rule is required is a sign that a 
> monorepo is a bad idea.

What special rule? If a dmd change breaks Phobos, doesn't it make 
more sense to fix Phobos in the same PR than submitting a 
separate PR to the Phobos repo (and having to explain that it's 
because of dmd PR #12345)?