monorepo.tools VS tanstack.com

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

- UI kit (I personally have good experience with React Material UI - https://mui.com/; there is also https://tanstack.com/)

I recently listened to a talk by Tanner Linsley, the creator of TanStack (React Query), about his personal experience in the open-source community. I highly recommend listening to it:

Link - https://tanstack.com/

tanstack router

Svelte doesn't use a virtual DOM and when it compiles, it only targets what you are specifically using it for.

The thing with Svelte is that for a big project (like an SPA) you're going to end up using SvelteKit, because that's where all the development focus is for things like routing etc... and SvelteKit isn't nearly as settled. As in, there aren't developed "patterns" for doing a lot of things yet so it's a lot of trailblazing. There's also some features that are missing and on the roadmap but SvelteKit just hit 1.0 in December (these are usually more obscure things but you will still likely encounter them if you're building something of moderate complexity.)

I still think overall it would be fine to use for a big project, but a year from now I think it will be a much easier choice. Something that is happening right now is a lot of big players in the wider JS ecosystem are transforming from being React specific to framework agnostic:

- NextJS -> Auth.js: https://twitter.com/balazsorban44/status/1603082914362986496

- React Table / React Query -> TanStack Table, TanStack Query: https://tanstack.com/

This has all happened in the last few months. So it's still new, and they're still improving as they move away from being React specific. People rely on those projects. As more move in that direction I think it will become easier and easier.

5: TanStack React

This is where the TanStack comes in. I really hope that the fact that the TanStack has all packages built in a framework-agnostic way will help adoption of non-React libraries over time. Think about it: If you need to fetch some data, render a table and maybe virtualize it - you can do all of that with the TanStack. And if you know how to do this in React, you also already know how to do it in Solid, Svelte or Vue.

Other popular packages in this generation include the tanstack series of packages:

Disclaimer, I'm the founder of AG Grid, however I'm also friends with Tanner. You can see from tanstack.com that AG Grid is both a sponsor but more importantly a partner with TanStack.