monorepo.tools VS React

I'm surprised this isn't getting any attention. Reading the docs, sounds very promising, thanks for creating this! I see Nx, Turbo and Moon being mentioned in passing in [Alternatives & pitfalls](https://onerepo.tools/concepts/why-onerepo/#alternatives--pi...), but a more in-depth comparison would be interesting. At least something that could be a column in the table at the bottom of [monorepo.tools](https://monorepo.tools/#tools-review).

> I don't think anyone coming from a multi-repo world really understands the full implications of a monorepo until they've worked in a large scale one

That's entirely fair. My sole experience is the one black-sheep monorepo at my own relatively-recently joined company, which is nowhere even close to approaching true large scale.

Genuine question, though - what _are_ the advantages, as you see them (you didn't explicitly say as much, but I'm reading between the lines that you _can_ see some)? Every positive claim I've seen (primarily at https://monorepo.tools/, but also elsewhere) feels either flimsy, or outright false:

* "No overhead to create new projects - Use the existing CI setup" - I'm pretty confident that the amount of DX tooling work to make it super-smooth to create a new project is _dwarfed_ by the amount of work to make monorepos...work...

* "Atomic commits across projects // One version of everything" - this is...actively bad? If I make a change to my library, I also have to change every consumer of it (or, worse, synchronize with them to make their changes at the same time before I can merge)? Whereas, in a polyrepo situation, I can publish the new version of my library, and decoupled consumers can update their consumption when they want to

* "Developer mobility - Get a consistent way of building and testing applications" - it's perfectly easy to have a consistent experience across polyrepos, and or to have an inconsistent one in a monorepo. In fairness I will concede that a monorepo makes a consistent experience more _likely_, but that's a weak advantage at best. Monorepos _do_ make it significantly harder to _deliberately_ use different languages in different services, though, which is a perfectly cromulent thing to permit.

The section on what monorepo tools should provide is useful if you are planning to set up an enterprise-level monorepo.

The next step would be to familiarize yourself with the codebase. Most of the repositories use monorepos for organizing and managing their code. A rule of the thumb here would be to make yourself familiar with what component lies in which place. It is next to impossible to understand the entire codebase at once. For starters, you can:

Monorepos are a great concept, especially in environments like Node.js which encourage having many small packages.

You might want to use monorepo tooling like NX, Lerna, or Turborepo to guide you. https://monorepo.tools/ has a list of tools.

This explains it really well: https://monorepo.tools/

Have a look here to get some good context around monorepo tooling and if it’s something you actually need and want to do - https://monorepo.tools Some of the monorepo tooling can be a steep learning curve so you want to really think about the problem you are trying to solve and whether the effort will be worth it

We are continuing to add new project templates for various types of projects, and we've recently created one for the infamous combination of React with Vite tooling.

Go to https://react.dev/?uwu=true for a surprise.

You can use any frontend framework you want — react-based tooling, however, has a natural advantage as it models everything as a function of state, which can map 1:1 with the concept in Burr. In the demo app we use react, react-query, and tailwind, but we’ll be skipping over this largely (it is not central to the purpose of the post).

Oddly, no info on changelog: https://github.com/facebook/react/blob/main/CHANGELOG.md

In this post, we get to know more about Preact, one of this year's trending libraries. And we'll compare it to React to see which one suits better for our projects.

Cheryl Murphy is not only a dedicated full-stack web developer skilled in technologies like React, Next.js, and NestJs but also a community-driven professional who recently took on the role of volunteer project team lead at Web Dev Path. With a dual Bachelor's degree in Computing and Chemical Engineering from Monash University, Cheryl’s journey in tech is marked by a passion for building accessible solutions and a commitment to fostering community within tech.

Basic knowledge of ReactJs

Google Translate and many other libraries break React based sites if they are using refs.

I don't think that point it falls under "written on naive assumptions"

https://github.com/facebook/react/issues/11538

the issue says closed but you can easily catch it in various sites and use cases.

This article serves as your comprehensive guide to mastering the art of combining Bootstrap and React seamlessly. Dive in to uncover the tips, tricks, and best practices to elevate your UI design game effortlessly.

This isn’t an accident; when Meta introduced React Server Components, Dan Abramov explicitly stated that they collaborated with the Next.js team to develop the RSC webpack plugin.