For big projects, especially open source ones, modularity isn't just good engineering practice. It significantly increases the chance of success of a project, because even if the overall project isn't popular subcomponents can be.
-
Show this thread
-
Rails, split out of Basecamp, is an important example. Or ICU, split out of Taligent of all things!
2 replies 1 retweet 25 likesShow this thread -
In my case, the biggest success of the Pathfinder project so far hasn't been Pathfinder itself but rather font-kit. I could have easily made it tightly coupled to PF, but then it would have far fewer users right now, because Pathfinder isn't yet done.
4 replies 1 retweet 39 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @pcwalton
Modularity is the only way for modern open source products to work: spin out dependencies; build / support communities; minimize the "actual product" tree size. Superlinear contributor impact (your added code/tests impact everyone else!) implies the need to modularize.
3 replies 2 retweets 16 likes -
Replying to @larsberg_ @pcwalton
Chromium is an (unfortunate IMO) exception
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Eh, Chromium (and Linux) just prove that if you’re big enough you can overcome the inherent drawbacks of the monolithic approach. It’s popular in spite of that approach, not because of it.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.