In February 2025 the actual-server repository was merged into the Actual repository. The reasons for this change are as follows: Streamlines Development: Developers will only need to clone/sync one repo instead of two. Improves Debugging: It makes end-to-end debugging for server/client easier as they will be in the same workspace. Simplifies Desktop App Packaging: Enables the desktop app to embed the sync server. Ensures code consistency and reduces the maintenance burden. Simplifies the release process

For larger projects with multiple interconnected components, monorepos can be a game-changer, providing efficient dependency management, atomic commits, simplified code sharing, and an improved developer experience.

When you need to publish multiple packages and want to avoid your contributors having to open PRs on many separate repositories whenever they want to make a change.

This pattern is often called monorepo when used in conjunction with a repository.

Sharing models

{ "folders": [ { "path": "apps/api" }, { "path": "apps/crawler" }, { "name": "root", "path": "." } ], "settings": {} }

This has moved to part of the monorepo:

Workspaces make monorepo-style projects more manageable.

These days, Monorepo’s and Typescript are very popular, but configuring the development environment to work with both is still a fairly complex task.

Monorepo use cases

Apart from that it’s just more convenient to have all your source files opened in a single IDE instance. You can jump from project to project without switching windows on your desktop.

New changes to the old repositories can be imported into the monorepo and merged in. For example, in the above example, say repository one had a branch my_branch which continued to be developed after the migration. To pull those changes in:

Maybe the source code was originally thought to be independent but was later discovered to be “rightly coupled”.

They also let us make assumptions about relative relationships between folders during development.

Monorepos let us version our back-end with our front-end, making compability easy with combined builds and deployments using a shared CI/CD pipeline.

This repository contains the source code for:

However, if all of these are hosted in the same repository, you lose a lot of those benefits.

I chose to use a monorepo: to reduce development friction in managing my various projects to utilize patterns across my projects

Wouldn't it make more sense contextually to put this in the Sapper docs site; https://sapper.svelte.dev? We could also have a repo for the more complex examples but then it would need to be maintained etc.

For a non-monorepo package you can simply point directly to the Github repo. This case is similar, but you want to scope it just to a single package within the repo. For those that make monorepos they don't necessarily need this feature. It's for those that use projects that use monorepos. Telling them to not organize their projects into monorepos doesn't help people who make use of these projects.

npm's inability to handle monorepos then i'd have designed my repos accordingly

You'll also have a directory structure that looks like this:

uses a "monorepo" organization style for managing multiple npm packages in a single git repo. This is done through a Yarn feature called workspaces.