dependency management - One simple but monolithic codebase vs many clearly documented dependencies -

After starting a new project, I start with the structure that believes in the best intentions in terms of structure Codebase I love the idea of ​​having several small modules that do one thing well, are d-mixing from other parts of the codebase, and possibly in other (similar) projects, Can be used or open to sourced to take advantage of others.

What are the advantages and disadvantages of these different approaches, and how do you work in the same way or other of a monolithic codebase

How do I manage tax?

Easy to deploy

Easy to rollback

All changes are easy to branch / manage

Potential complex dependencies to document and manage (or less)

Benefits of modular dependencies:

• Re-use
• Clean architecture (A module does one thing well)

As much as you do to me The opposite does not look like an example As a net taking experience, I can ensure that parts of my code are capable of well-defined responsibilities, and I can structure my codebase in namespace to ensure that the heart of the namespace The touch points are well defined, the classes inside the same name space are actually to be together.

However, it can be all deployed in a single unit, single project, branch, you have what you think is stick to that, if the units of code projects you will be crystallized in It can be re-usable and said that the point where, with its own deployment artifact, source control branch can start a new unit of code, etc.