[mimog]

Isn't this "the Unix way"? I have seen this style of small cohesive programs promoted a lot in Linux/Unix literature so the advise isn't really breaking any new ground. Look at git for instance. The advise is of course sound but it goes against the "enterprisy" way of doing things, in part because they tend to be using huge frameworks from the get go.

[IvyMike]

On the other hand, think back to the famous macro- v. micro-kernel debate. The kernel itself is huge, and the "small cohesive service" philosophy microkernel advocates ended up never really taking over the world.

[marcosdumay]

That's because kernels perform differently from user software (they have more optimizations available), and a lot of big code needs that extra performance.

That's a fact that still didn't change, but user level code is getting more powerful (mainly for virtual machines), and computers are still getting faster. So, it's still too early to declare the race finished.

Anyway, none of that has any relevance to how one should organize user level code.

[bitwize]

It used to be. It may still be if you hang out on #suckless. But most of the Linux folks these days love their huge monolithic PulseAudios and systemds.

[vanwaril]

And why would you say systemd is monolithic? Have you looked at the source-code for it? Have you looked at how services are configured with it? I would argue its far more modular than sysVinit.