[albedoa]

> Unmigrated semver breaking changes are a form of technical debt

Maybe you can clear my confusion. If Module B is dependent on Module A, then every version of B should refer to a specific version of A, correct? What is there to break? Development can continue on A without interfering with B, and then you can uptick B once it points to a later A.

I'm not sure what this has to do with the mono/poly discussion.

[woolvalley]

Engineering resources are not unlimited, so naturally new bugs and features will be updated only on master vs. 2 or 5 major semver branches, because 2-5 module Bs haven't bothered updating yet. If you maintain 5 separate branches, then you're spending that much more engineering resources for little benefit, because you don't have external customers. So the modules that haven't migrated yet decay under a state of deferred maintenance, which is a form of technical debt.

To avoid that, you do 10 migration commits so everyone is on the latest version. If you're going to do that as standard operating procedure anyway might as well make it far easier and have a monorepo.