🚧 Moving to monorepo

[danielkcz]

We want to move together mobx-react & mobx-react-lite (more later maybe) into this repo to ease on issue duplication and to provide better idea of where to find help.

• Transfer existing issues and disable issue reporting in those repos.
• Move API documentation from respective repos to mobx.js.org.
• Sort out pending PRs (merge or close).

---

• Restructure this repo to monorepo.
• Modify changesets tool to work in monorepo.
• Figure out how to set up CI for the monorepo to run tests (help wanted).
• Build ESM dev/prod bundles for the browser consumption
• Move mobx-react codebase to this repo and archive it.
• Move mobx-react-lite codebase to this repo and archive it.

[spion]

Does this include closed issues? I was looking for a past discussion in mobx-react-lite and i am not able to read or find it.

edit: specifically it was https://github.com/mobxjs/mobx-react/issues/744 and is now only available through google cache AFAICT

[danielkcz]

Yea. I suppose it will block access to closed issues as well. Not the best, but what can you do :) I've transferred that issue and converted to discussion for you: #2531

[danielkcz]

If anyone is feeling on working on the documentation migration, help is certainly wanted. I will be able to get to this in a week or more.

[jeremy-coleman]

I would like to see the 3 versions align if possible. It would make keeping compatible versions a non issue.

[danielkcz]

I would like to see the 3 versions align if possible. It would make keeping compatible versions a non issue.

Nah, that doesn't make much sense. These packages are not that tightly coupled. The mobx is the main one here and when a major version happens, it might affect others. But not the other way around. Changes to binding packages hardly warrant publishing mobx even without changes.

[Bnaya]

related proposal: move to yarn2
I've been tracking yarn 2 progress, and when using nodeLinker (and not pnp) it's a drop-in replacement for yarn 1,
And actively maintained, and support additional goodies

[danielkcz]

@Bnaya Can you elaborate on what would be the benefit of that? I tried to toy with Yarn2 shortly after its release and was a bit confused about it.

[jeremy-coleman]

Freddy i know they arent coupled , but what is the downside? The latest versions should always maintain cross compatibility and mobx now supports proxy/no proxy runtimes in the same version, so i only see benefits, but maybe Im missing something?

[danielkcz]

I already said downside. Making a change to the binding package is not a good reason to publish the other two as well. Especially if the change is compatible and works with previous versions. This pattern makes sense for example to UI libraries where dependencies are harder to track and follow due to many packages. Similarly Babel with numerous plugins it's easier to track compatibility that way.

[Bnaya]

@Bnaya Can you elaborate on what would be the benefit of that? I tried to toy with Yarn2 shortly after its release and was a bit confused about it.

While yarn 1 workspaces could work just fine,
It's, maintenance involvement is minimal, (eg: yarnpkg/yarn#7807)

And since it's release yarn 2 have gained several stability milestones:
babel & jest have are now using it
the node modules linker is fully operational (babel & jest using it)
It has many new super small features such as:
https://yarnpkg.com/configuration/manifest/#publishConfig

I've opened a PR for that:
#2573

[danielkcz]

And it's done. It was a rather tough chore, but everything seems to be working now. If I broke something I wasn't aware of, let me know :)

Hopefully, everything will be easier to maintain now when it's in a single spot.

Documentation for mobx-react(-lite) is still in their respective READMEs, but given the simplicity of the API layer, it can wait till someone is in the mood to integrate that with main docs.