Monorepo?

[John Colvin]

On Wednesday, 8 February 2023 at 00:40:44 UTC, Richard (Rikki) 
Andrew Cattermole wrote:
> On 07/02/2023 11:15 PM, Atila Neves wrote:
>> 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)?
>
> If a Phobos change breaks MIR, doesn't it make more sense to 
> fix MIR in the same PR than submitting a separate PR to the MIR 
> repo (and having to explain that its because of a Phobos PR 
> #12345)?
>
> We can apply this same logic to literally any code base that is 
> in the auto tester. The dmd repository is going to get quite 
> big when we keep including what should be isolated code bases 
> administratively...
>
> Personally I'm not sure that the zlib folks are going to want 
> to move development into the dmd repository. But hey, you guys 
> have pull so maybe you'll archive it!

There are competing effects at play here. While of course merging 
everything in to dmd would maximise one thing at the expense of 
others, that doesn’t have much bearing on whether merging any 
individual thing is worth doing. There is no slippery slope to 
fall down, just the usual balancing of factors based on insight 
from experience and theory.