Monorepo vs Microrepo

Introduction:

In modern software development, managing code repositories effectively is crucial for maintaining productivity and scalability. Two popular approaches for organizing repositories are the monorepo and microrepo strategies.

In this doc, we will cover:

• Monorepo
  • Advantages of Monorepo
  • Disadvantages of Monorepo
  • Folder Structure
• Microrepo
  • Advantages of Microrepo
  • Disadvantages of Microrepo
  • Folder Structure

Monorepo

A monorepo, short for "monolithic repository," is an approach where multiple projects or components are stored within a single repository. In the context of a project with a backend and frontend, the codebases for both the backend and frontend would reside in a single monorepo.

Advantages of Monorepo

This approach offers several advantages. Let's take a look at some of the benefits of this approach.

1. Shared Dependencies:

Code reuse: Sharing dependencies, libraries, and tools between the backend and frontend promotes code reuse and ensures consistency across the entire project.

Streamlined maintenance: Managing and updating shared dependencies becomes easier, reducing duplication and potential inconsistencies.

2. Simplified Collaboration:

Unified development environment: Developers working on different components can easily collaborate and share code changes, fostering a unified development environment.

Streamlined code reviews: With all code residing in one repository, code reviews become more efficient and coordinated, enhancing collaboration among team members.

3. Simplified Builds and Testing:

Integration consistency: Building and testing the entire project becomes straightforward in a monorepo. Changes to multiple components can be tested together, ensuring compatibility and reducing integration issues.

Easier debugging: Debugging across the entire project becomes simpler, as developers can access the whole codebase in one repository.

Disadvantages of Monorepo

While monorepos offer several benefits, they also have some drawbacks. Let's take a look at some of the disadvantages of this approach.

1. Increased Complexity:

Increased learning curve: Monorepos can be more complex to set up and maintain, requiring additional tooling and configuration.

Increased risk: With all code residing in one repository, there is a higher risk of introducing bugs or breaking changes that impact multiple components.

2. Reduced Flexibility:

Limited technology choices: Monorepos require all components to use the same programming language and framework, limiting flexibility in technology choices.

Limited autonomy: Monorepos can limit the autonomy of backend and frontend teams, as they must work within the same repository.

Folder Structure

A monorepo can be structured in different ways. Let's take a look at some common approaches to give you the idea how could it be structured.

📂monorepo
├── 📂.github
├── 📂backend
│   ├── 📂src
│   ├── 📂tests
│   ├── 🗃️package.json
│   └── 🗃️README.md
├── 📂frontend
│   ├── 📂src
│   ├── 📂tests
│   ├── 🗃️package.json
│   └── 🗃️README.md
├── 🗃️.gitignore
├── 🗃️.prettierrc
├── 🗃️.eslintrc
├── 🗃️.huskyrc
├── 🗃️LICENSE
├── 🗃️package.json
├── 🗃️README.md
└── 🗃️CHANGELOG.md

Microrepo

Microrepos, or "microservices repositories," involve maintaining separate repositories for each microservice or component of a project. In the case of a backend and frontend project, there would be a dedicated repository for the backend and another for the frontend.

Advantages of Microrepo

Microrepos offer specific advantages in certain scenarios. Let's take a look at some of the benefits of this approach.

1. Decentralized Development:

Autonomy and ownership: Microrepos allow backend and frontend teams to have separate repositories, providing greater autonomy and flexibility in their respective codebases.

Independent versioning: Each component can be developed and versioned independently, enabling teams to release updates without affecting other components.

2. Independent Deployment:

Scalability and resilience: Microrepos enable independent deployment of individual services or components. Each microservice can be scaled, updated, or rolled back without impacting other components, leading to increased system resilience and scalability.

Faster release cycles: Teams can release updates to specific components without having to wait for other components to be ready, enabling faster release cycles.

3. Language and Framework Flexibility:

Choosing the right tool for the job: Microrepos provides the freedom to select different programming languages or frameworks for different components. This allows teams to leverage technologies that best fit the specific requirements of each component.

Reduced risk: With each component residing in a separate repository, there is a lower risk of introducing bugs or breaking changes that impact multiple components.

Disadvantages of Microrepo

While microrepos offer several benefits, they also have some drawbacks. Let's take a look at some of the disadvantages of this approach.

1. Increased Complexity:

Increased learning curve: Microrepos can be more complex to set up and maintain, requiring additional tooling and configuration.

Increased overhead: Managing multiple repositories can be more time-consuming and resource-intensive, increasing overhead.

2. Reduced Collaboration:

Increased coordination: With each component residing in a separate repository, coordination between teams becomes more challenging.

Reduced code reuse: Microrepos can lead to code duplication, as teams may be less likely to share code between repositories.

Folder Structure

A microrepo can be structured in different ways. Let's take a look at some common approaches to give you the idea how could it be structured.

As there are multiple repositories, each repository can have its own folder structure. For example, the backend repository could be structured as follows:

📂backend
├── 📂.github
├── 📂src
├── 📂tests
├── 🗃️package.json
└── 🗃️README.md

Similarly, the frontend repository could be structured as follows:

📂frontend
├── 📂.github
├── 📂src
├── 📂tests
├── 🗃️package.json
└── 🗃️README.md

Choosing the Right Approach:

When deciding between a monorepo and microrepo strategy for a project with separate backend and frontend components, several factors should be considered.

1. Project Size and Complexity:

• Monorepos are generally more suitable for large projects with complex interdependencies. If the backend and frontend are tightly coupled and share many common dependencies, a monorepo can simplify development and maintenance.
• Microrepos are often preferred for smaller projects or those with loosely coupled components, as they allow for more granular control and flexibility.

2. Team Structure and Autonomy:

• If backend and frontend teams work independently and prefer autonomy in their codebases, microrepos can provide more flexibility and ownership.
• Monorepos are beneficial for fostering collaboration and sharing code among teams working on different components.

3. Deployment and Scalability Needs:

• If the project follows a microservices architecture, where components need independent deployment and scalability, microrepos align more closely with this approach.
• Monorepos may be preferred when a unified release and deployment process across all components is required.

Summary:

Choosing the right repository strategy, whether a monorepo or microrepo, depends on various project-specific factors. For a project with separate backend and frontend components, both approaches have their advantages. Monorepos facilitate code sharing, collaboration, and streamlined testing, while microrepos offer decentralized development, independent deployment, and flexibility in technology choices. By carefully evaluating the project's size, complexity, team structure, and deployment needs, you can make an informed decision to optimize your development workflow and set your project up for success.