Centralized code management

[mouakter13]

Having a single repository gives visibility of all code to all developers. It simplifies code management as we can use a single issue tracker to monitor all issues throughout the application lifecycle.

For example, these features are valuable when a problem extends to two (or more) child libraries with the bug existing in the dependent library. With multiple repositories, it can be challenging to find the piece of code where the problem occurs.

Additionally, we would need to figure out which repository to use to create the issue, and then invite and tag members of other teams to help resolve the issue.

However, with a monorepo, both locating code problems and collaborating to fix them are easier.

Hassle-free application refactorings
When creating an application-wide code refactoring, multiple libraries will be affected. If you host them in multiple repositories, managing all the pull requests to keep them in sync with each other can be a challenge.

A monorepo makes it easy to make all changes to all code in all libraries and submit them under a single pull request.

Harder to break adjacent functionality
With the monorepo, we can configure all tests for all taiwan whatsapp number data libraries to run whenever any of them is modified. As a result, the probability of making a change in some libraries has minimized the adverse effects on other libraries.

Teams share the development culture
While not impossible, with a monorepo approach, it is difficult to inspire unique subcultures across different teams. Since they will share the same repository, they will most likely share the same programming and management methodologies and use the same development tools .

Problems with the monorepo approach
Using a single repository for all our code has several drawbacks.

Slower development cycles
When a library's code contains breaking changes, which cause tests of dependent libraries to fail, the code must also be fixed before the changes are merged.