Open derberg opened 1 year ago
@derberg i saw we need to implement the monorepo for this i would like to work on this. Please let know how should i go about this.
@ayushnau for now it is proposal and a discussion
ok @derberg
@jonaslagoni @magicmatatjahu wdyt
Sounds good to me 🤙
Hey! would like to work on this issue, can i get it assigned? @derberg Thanks!
@ayushnau @Aryann15 are you folks still interested with helping here? did you have experience with introducing monorepo in the past?
first step would be project refactor and migration of first package from https://github.com/asyncapi/generator-filters
if you are interested working on it, please first share your plan before opening a PR
Hi I would love to work on this issue.
added to bounty:
@asyncapi/generator
and we still release @asyncapi/filters
, just from one repo. Release can have the same number, we do not need separate versioningany other questions?
Questions:
@derberg
Text labels: bounty/2024-Q2
, bounty/advanced
, bounty/coding
First assignment to third-party contributors: 2024-03-22 00:00:00 UTC+12:00
End Of Life: 2024-08-31 23:59:59 UTC-12:00
@asyncapi/bounty_team
Is turborepo final for migrating generator repos to it.
tbh I don't have any preference on what tool we choose. If we do npm workspaces, lerna or turborepo. Afaik you have experience with monorepo, so if you think turborepo is good investment, lets do it.
So Generally we put all the functions and miscellaneous stuff like common scripts in. packages. (package containing all the shared stuff of all the apps.) which can be used so will we take some of shared stuff of the repos and put that into packages.
we still need to release @asyncapi/generator
and we will still have to release @asyncapi/filters
. If there will be some common code then definitely we should have shared commons.
Filters technically are a feature only for generator templates that run on Nunjucks engine. So template developer uses it in the way that they add filters package to dependencies and then adds module name to filters
in the config. So in theory, your job is a simple as move filters in, make sure they are released and that is it. But would be super nice if you can come up with an idea how to make sure @asyncapi/filters
are included in asyncapi/generator
by default, so nobody have to enable them by configuration.
And do we want to put all the ci/cd flows in their own repos or will unite them into one.
afaik workflows from https://github.com/asyncapi/generator-filters can be dropped as they are all anyway pulled from .github
repo (so are the same that also in generator
) repo. You just need to make sure that whatever workflows we have here, for release or bump - will still work
We want to maintain git history of each app
Not a strong requirement - just lemme know what options we have. The plan is that basically this https://github.com/asyncapi/generator-filters will be archived and moved to https://github.com/asyncapi-archived-repos so history will still be there. But if there is some cool git magic available so we can preserve history of filters in generator, lets see. I admit I'm not such a git expert
Please also work closely with people from https://github.com/asyncapi/parser-js/issues/963 as might be that best would be to have the same solution in both
@AyushNautiyalDeveloper so, still interested?
yeah Sure @derberg once you answer those question I will add short development guide. as required.
I think we have twins here 😄
btw, my answers are above
@ayushnau ok, please go ahead, the issue is yours
ok thanks will start working on this then.
Complexity Level | Assignment date (by GitHub) | Start date (by BP rules) | End date (by BP rules) | Draft PR submission | Final PR submission | Final PR merge |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Advanced | 2024-03-21 | 2024-04-01 | 2024-05-24 | 2024-04-19 | 2024-05-10 | 2024-05-24 |
Feature | TurboRepo | Lerna | Yarn Workspaces | Nx |
---|---|---|---|---|
Performance | High performance with caching and parallelization | Decent performance, may slow down with large repos | Decent performance, can suffer with large repos | High performance with advanced caching and builders |
Dependency Management | Integrated dependency resolution | Basic dependency management | Integrated with Yarn, follows Yarn's resolution | Integrated dependency graph for efficient builds |
Versioning | Integrated version management | Incremental versioning with fixed or independent | Integrated with Yarn, follows SemVer | Semantic versioning with versioning strategies |
Language Support | Primarily JavaScript and TypeScript | Primarily JavaScript and TypeScript | JavaScript, TypeScript, and more | JavaScript, TypeScript, and more |
Community Support | Growing community support | Large and established community | Strong community support | Strong community support |
Ease of Setup | Straightforward setup and configuration | Moderate setup with configuration options | Integrated with Yarn, relatively easy to set up | Straightforward setup and integration |
Integration with CI/CD | Supports various CI/CD pipelines | Compatible with common CI/CD tools | Compatible with common CI/CD tools | Integrated CI/CD support and workflows |
Adding a single repo will look like this
Install and do basic setup of TurboRepo. Note: We will be using npm as a package manager as we have used npm in every package.
Add the @asyncapi/filter
code to the apps
directory of the turborepo.
Add the configuration for the @asyncapi/filter
to the Turbo.json
file in the root directory.
Add all the required scripts in the package.json
file for the @asyncapi/filter
. (To run apps package.json
scripts from root)
https://github.com/ayushnau/generator
Added the @asyncapi/generator-filters repo
And For git history It is possible to maintain the history of every repo merged into one. As i have done with this current repo. @derberg
can you specify what is the goal of https://github.com/ayushnau/generator ? just for testing? The changes that you introduce should be done in a typical way through a fork
What should be the name of the repo? It can't be "Generator" as we are going to use it for its own repo.
we keep the name for now, is that a blocker? all additional stuff we will move to generator
are considered plugins/extensions - apps is probably a good name too
So I have Decided to go with Turborepo. Here is a comparision for different options we had
thanks for great comparizon. Turborepo indeed looks interesting. Also notices even nodejs started using it https://github.com/nodejs/nodejs.org
awesome, feel free to DM me whenever you need help or there is something new I should look at - I'm a bit under water with notifications, so DM is working very well for me atm
@ayushnau I noticed you closed the PR, all good? what's the plan?
@derberg I am getting an issue with running test command.
This is coming due to the test trying to access the nims from node_modules. but turborepo have installed it in base node_modules. where all the internal and shared dependencies packages are installed.
Solution: I think what we can do is just change the directory
'^nimma/legacy$': '<rootDir>/node_modules/nimma/dist/legacy/cjs/index.js',
'^nimma/(.*)': '<rootDir>/node_modules/nimma/dist/cjs/$1',
to correct directory.
yup, go ahead 😀
@aeworxet adding
fyi, the implementation of the issue is delayed a bit as I was out for a couple of weeks for conference and holidays - so could not review, and there was noone else who could
not yet completed, we need new release pipeline and move into project one more app
@derberg can we mark this issue completed
@aeworxet bounty scope completed. I'm not closing the issue as there is still a need to move hooks into generator - but that was not part of bounty scope
After a delay that was beyond the control of the Bounty Program Participant https://github.com/asyncapi/generator/issues/1044#issuecomment-2178009805
@ayushnau, please go to the AsyncAPI page on Open Collective and submit an invoice for USD 400.00
with the expense title Bounty generator#1044
, tag bounty
, and full URL of this Bounty Issue in the description.
Current state
This granularity is technically possible so templated development is flexible. But the fact that we make it possible for others, to easily create private, independent and use case specific templates doesn't mean we should have this level of granularity in asyncapi GH org
Proposal - discussion
How about we turn
generator
into a monorepo?generator-react-sdk
- not a separate npm package, just natively part of generatorgenerator-filters
andgenerator-hooks
also natively a part of generator (we still want to enable people to provide theirs independently)Why
generator-react-sdk
as separate package is kinda confusing and in general my impression is that motivation for having it as a separate package was that then it can be written in TS@asyncapi/*-template
to the monorepo. But I think many would, as having it in our repo, with multiple maintainers/champions (yeah, we would have champion like setup like in modelina) would make it easier and quicker to reuse solutions from other templates, filters, components and other stuff. Under one repo it would be easier to focus or reusability and good standards (like always using modelina for models generation)We would still be flexible, independent templates would be possible, hooks and filters too.
Having all under one umbrella would make generator a more vibrant project, more actively developed and visible.
wdyt?
any disadvantages that I do not see?