Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Extract protobuf_workspace to a separate repository #76

Open
simuons opened this issue Nov 20, 2020 · 0 comments
Open

Extract protobuf_workspace to a separate repository #76

simuons opened this issue Nov 20, 2020 · 0 comments
Labels
P3 We're not considering to work on this, but happy to review a PR. (No assignee)

Comments

@simuons
Copy link

simuons commented Nov 20, 2020

Released protoc binaries are great. It saves a lot of build time. Thanks for doing this!

However, maybe this could be extracted to a separate repository?

If I have to use rules_proto directly then the setup is really simple (just call rules_proto_dependencies in my workspace and it's done).

But things are getting slightly complicated for rules authors where rules depend on protoc. It's is not enough for a ruleset to provide rules_lang_dependencies in order to get protoc setup. You have to ask users of the ruleset to call rules_proto_dependencies directly or via some utility macro in their workspace.

It would be nice if rules authors could declare a repository in rules_lang_dependencies

http_archive(
    name = "com_google_protobuf",
    url = "a-repo-with-released-binaries/3.13.0.tar.gz",
)

I think this also somewhat relates to #73 because that proposed repository with released binaries could have different releases corresponding to protoc binary versions.

Also if I understood correctly the new plan of migrating native rules to starlark https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GW7UVo1s9X0cti9OMgT3ga5ozKYUWLPk9k8c4-34rC4/edit#heading=h.e2vec9j9h1s9 bazel users will not be supposed to load rules_proto in their workspaces. In this case (I think) a separate repository with released binaries also would make sense.

@comius comius added the P3 We're not considering to work on this, but happy to review a PR. (No assignee) label Feb 10, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
P3 We're not considering to work on this, but happy to review a PR. (No assignee)
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants