Status of "Approved" proposals

[Lukács T. Berki]

Hey folks,

Continuing my effort to clean up the bazelbuild/proposals repository, this time, I'm looking at the proposals in the "Accepted state". Please help me decide whether they were in fact implemented or ended up being dropped.

@Nathan:

• "Splitting large BEP events": AFAIU this is #5715 and it got dropped for some reason? (I don't see a child_events_continuation field, which corroborates this). Do you remember?

@Alex:

• "Decoupling android_ndk repository from Bazel": My understanding is that this is being implemented, but given that it's been five years, I think it's better to call it dropped, since the current plan is presumably very different?
•  I suppose it's fair to call "Android Native to Starlark Migration" in progress?
  

@Ivo:

• We went with the builtins repository so I guess "Load Bazel Protobuf rules from @rules_proto" should be dropped?
  
• I think it's fair to call "Injecting Stalark values into builtins" implemented, isn't it?
  
• The "C++ to Skylark Migration Plan" is still the plan of record, right?
  
• I assume "Java common refactoring" was implemented?
  
• "Custom constructors for providers" did not get implemented, did it? Let's drop it then?
  
• "Aspects Propagating Aspects" got implemented, right?
  
• "Improving native.existing_rules" got implemented, right?
  

@John C:

• Are we still planning to do "Optional toolchains"?
  
•  "Execution Platforms and Strategies" seems to have been dropped?

@Tony:

• @Tony: What's the status of "Rules for Software License Compliance"? 
  

--

Lukács T. Berki | Software Engineer | lbe...@google.com | 

Google Germany GmbH | Erika-Mann-Str. 33  | 80636 München | Germany | Geschäftsführer: Paul Manicle, Halimah DeLaine Prado | Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB 86891

[John Cater]

On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 5:08 AM Lukács T. Berki <lbe...@google.com> wrote:

@John C:

• Are we still planning to do "Optional toolchains"?
  

This is done, I'll update today. 

•  "Execution Platforms and Strategies" seems to have been dropped?

It needs to be redone, I'll make a note.

[Tony Aiuto]

• @Tony: What's the status of "Rules for Software License Compliance"? 

Ongoing implementation. The basic ideas are in place, and the core code is in place, so we could say "implemented".  The work, however, never ends as the SBOM effort rescoped it, and we believe the requirements will grow incrementally each year.   I'll send a PR now.

[Ivo Ristovski List]

• We went with the builtins repository so I guess "Load Bazel Protobuf rules from @rules_proto" should be dropped?
  

There's a migration tag, but no checks. Dropped.

• I think it's fair to call "Injecting Stalark values into builtins" implemented, isn't it?

Implemented

• The "C++ to Skylark Migration Plan" is still the plan of record, right?
  

Seems this way, however owners have changed.

• I assume "Java common refactoring" was implemented?
  

90% implemented, so I think it's safe to call it implemented.

• "Custom constructors for providers" did not get implemented, did it? Let's drop it then?

No. It was implemented.

• "Aspects Propagating Aspects" got implemented, right?

Implemented.

• "Improving native.existing_rules" got implemented, right?

Implemented

[Alex Humesky]

On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 5:08 AM Lukács T. Berki <lbe...@google.com> wrote:

Hey folks,

Continuing my effort to clean up the bazelbuild/proposals repository, this time, I'm looking at the proposals in the "Accepted state". Please help me decide whether they were in fact implemented or ended up being dropped.

@Nathan:

• "Splitting large BEP events": AFAIU this is #5715 and it got dropped for some reason? (I don't see a child_events_continuation field, which corroborates this). Do you remember?

@Alex:

• "Decoupling android_ndk repository from Bazel": My understanding is that this is being implemented, but given that it's been five years, I think it's better to call it dropped, since the current plan is presumably very different?

Correct, the spirit of this has been implemented as github.com/bazelbuild/rules_android_ndk. There are still several loose ends around implementing missing features, and migrating users to the new rules (e.g. tensorflow)

 

•  I suppose it's fair to call "Android Native to Starlark Migration" in progress?
  

In progress indeed :)

[Lukács T. Berki]

Thanks (also for the other message).

I sent out https://github.com/bazelbuild/proposals/pull/314 to codify these.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "bazel-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bazel-dev+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bazel-dev/2c9b66e0-4184-4855-a61c-8367fd484623n%40googlegroups.com.