turbo VS monorepo.tools

Supermemory has three main modules, managed by turborepo:

From a structural viewpoint, we use a monorepo (Turborepo) to manage packages, even though we currently have only one Next.js app. We chose this setup because it prepares us for future developments, which will include additional apps. This arrangement helps keep the packages well-separated and self-contained.

# src Dockerfile: https://github.com/vercel/turbo/blob/main/examples/with-docker/apps/web/Dockerfile FROM node:18-alpine AS alpine # setup pnpm on the alpine base FROM alpine as base ENV PNPM_HOME="/pnpm" ENV PATH="$PNPM_HOME:$PATH" RUN corepack enable RUN pnpm install turbo --global FROM base AS builder # Check https://github.com/nodejs/docker-node/tree/b4117f9333da4138b03a546ec926ef50a31506c3#nodealpine to understand why libc6-compat might be needed. RUN apk add --no-cache libc6-compat RUN apk update # Set working directory WORKDIR /app COPY . . RUN turbo prune --scope=web --docker # Add lockfile and package.json's of isolated subworkspace FROM base AS installer RUN apk add --no-cache libc6-compat RUN apk update WORKDIR /app # First install the dependencies (as they change less often) COPY .gitignore .gitignore COPY --from=builder /app/out/json/ . COPY --from=builder /app/out/pnpm-lock.yaml ./pnpm-lock.yaml COPY --from=builder /app/out/pnpm-workspace.yaml ./pnpm-workspace.yaml RUN pnpm install # Build the project COPY --from=builder /app/out/full/ . COPY turbo.json turbo.json RUN turbo run build --filter=web # use alpine as the thinest image FROM alpine AS runner WORKDIR /app # Don't run production as root RUN addgroup --system --gid 1001 nodejs RUN adduser --system --uid 1001 nextjs USER nextjs COPY --from=installer /app/apps/web/next.config.js . COPY --from=installer /app/apps/web/package.json . # Automatically leverage output traces to reduce image size # https://nextjs.org/docs/advanced-features/output-file-tracing COPY --from=installer --chown=nextjs:nodejs /app/apps/web/.next/standalone ./ COPY --from=installer --chown=nextjs:nodejs /app/apps/web/.next/static ./apps/web/.next/static COPY --from=installer --chown=nextjs:nodejs /app/apps/web/public ./apps/web/public CMD node apps/web/server.js

Following this example: https://github.com/vercel/turbo/tree/main/examples/with-docker/apps/web. Except I'm using pnpm. Edit Reddit Codeblocks are horrible and keeps removing all formatting.

The Dockerfile might seem a bit complicated (it is), but the reason for that is mostly just turborepo and the need for good caching. Realistically, you will only need to change the last line, if at all. It is based on this awesome Github Issue.

PURISTA is organized in a monorepo. During the development and build process, Turbo is used to execute different tasks and steps on multiple packages with one command.

Turbo repo

Previously we mapped each Vercel project to a single Supabase project. With this release, we're introducing the concept of project 'Connections'. Supabase projects can have an unlimited number of Vercel Connections. This is especially useful for monorepos using Turborepo.

One detail I enjoy from this post is that sometimes you can just call a CLI[0]. It's easy to spend a lot of time figuring out how to expose some Rust/C code as a library for your language, but I like the simplicity of just compiling, shipping the binary and then calling it as a subprocess.

Yes, there's overhead in starting a new process to "just call a function", but I think this approach is still underutilized.

[0]: https://github.com/vercel/turbo/blob/c0ee0dea7388d1081512c93...

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