Every time I read a post like this I'm reminded of how weird it is that we're storing all our code as plain text in flat files. This kind of diffing seems like it'd be a lot easier if functions had real identities.

Quickly browse the history of any GitHub file.

Decentralizing a service is not only a technical issue, but also about forming a new “social contract” among all the parties concerned. We are developing drepo, a decentralized Git hosting and…

A recent paper suggested a new mathematical
point of view on version control. I first found out about it from pijul,
a new version control system (VCS) that is loosely inspired by that paper. But
if you poke around the pijul home page, you won’t find
many details about what makes it different from existing VCSes. So I did a bit
of digging, and this series of blog posts is the result.

HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19070172

2.3 Cathedral vs. Bazaar

Fossil and Git promote different development styles. Git promotes a "bazaar" development style in which numerous anonymous developers make small and sometimes haphazard contributions. Fossil promotes a "cathedral" development model in which the project is closely supervised by an highly engaged architect and implemented by a clique of developers.

Nota Bene: This is not to say that Git cannot be used for cathedral-style development or that Fossil cannot be used for bazaar-style development. They can be. But those modes are not their design intent nor their low-friction path.

Git encourages a style in which individual developers work in relative isolation, maintaining their own branches and occasionally rebasing and pushing selected changes up to the main repository. Developers using Git often have their own private branches that nobody else ever sees. Work becomes siloed. This is exactly what one wants when doing bazaar-style development.

via Fast Company https://www.fastcompany.com

This is the wrong way to look at this.
The problem is not the "monorepo" - it's the culture of centralization that's endemic of enterprise "ownership"