Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Feature request: Merge secondary repos into xmtp-web #97

Closed
neekolas opened this issue Sep 25, 2023 · 2 comments
Closed

Feature request: Merge secondary repos into xmtp-web #97

neekolas opened this issue Sep 25, 2023 · 2 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@neekolas
Copy link
Contributor

Is your feature request related to a problem?

We have a lot of "support repos" for the web.

These repos all work in subtly different ways, with different tsconfig settings, lint rules, and build processes.

Describe the solution to the problem

We could benefit from consolidated tsconfig, build, lint, and test infrastructure by consolidating them into this monorepo. We have already done the work of making this repo work efficiently as a monorepo.

Describe the uses cases for the feature

Make it easier for developers to experiment with XMTP

Additional details

No response

@neekolas neekolas added the enhancement New feature or request label Sep 25, 2023
@neekolas neekolas changed the title Feature request: Merge secondary repos into here Feature request: Merge secondary repos into xmtp-web Sep 25, 2023
@fabriguespe
Copy link
Contributor

It's an interesting idea! However, I have some thoughts about why keeping the repositories separate might be more beneficial, especially for our DevRel efforts. These standalone repos are helpful when assisting beginner developers who are getting started with XMTP. They often seek quick, specific guidance, and these granular quickstarts seem to help them get unblocked swiftly.

Combining everything into a monorepo could potentially introduce more complexity, which might make it more difficult for beginners to understand individual features. Also, each of these repos is quite simple in terms of build and lint requirements. They primarily serve as functional examples for developers to reference and build upon.

Since many of them use similar components, maintaining them separately hasn't been a big challenge. Just wanted to share this perspective before we make any decisions!

@rygine
Copy link
Collaborator

rygine commented Jul 2, 2024

i'm going to close this issue as Won't Do for now. we can explore this option again in the future if it makes sense.

@rygine rygine closed this as completed Jul 2, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants