Making a decision on Bazel proposals

179 views
Skip to first unread message

Lukács T. Berki

unread,
Mar 30, 2023, 6:35:30 AM3/30/23
to Tony Aiuto, bazel-dev
Hey Tony,

You have a number of Bazel design proposals in the "in review" stage, some quite old. Mind helping me make a decision as to what should happen to them?


--
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

Tony Aiuto

unread,
Mar 30, 2023, 10:42:23 AM3/30/23
to Lukács T. Berki, bazel-dev
On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 6:35 AM Lukács T. Berki <lbe...@google.com> wrote:
Hey Tony,

You have a number of Bazel design proposals in the "in review" stage, some quite old. Mind helping me make a decision as to what should happen to them?

It is essentially implemented as part of EO work.

I still think it's the right idea for helping with I18N of error codes, but the bikeshedding headwind was strong. It was not a high enough priority to fight. "Deferred" as a new category?
 
It's not really a design. It's more of a "read me first" before trying to design or implement anything. That does not fit the model of "draft -> review -> approved|rejected -> implemented
Perhaps we add another section? Obsolete is wrong, but maybe "background reading"?

SGTM.  

Tony Aiuto

unread,
Mar 30, 2023, 10:44:23 AM3/30/23
to Lukács T. Berki, bazel-dev
I pressed send too early....  Are you doing a bulk edit of the bazel-proposals page or did you want me to do the PR for those doc changes?

ツ Sven Tiffe

unread,
Mar 30, 2023, 11:01:46 AM3/30/23
to Tony Aiuto, Lukács T. Berki, bazel-dev
On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 4:44 PM 'Tony Aiuto' via bazel-dev <baze...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
 
I still think it's the right idea for helping with I18N of error codes, but the bikeshedding headwind was strong. It was not a high enough priority to fight. "Deferred" as a new category?

My suggestion would be that if so far this has not gotten attention/traction, close it for the time being and reopen it if the time is right? That is the same thing as deferring, but we avoid keeping old proposals open forever (which I assume is one motivation for Lukacs to do the cleanup and which is something we are trying to achieve with old PRs as well). 
It's not really a design. It's more of a "read me first" before trying to design or implement anything. That does not fit the model of "draft -> review -> approved|rejected -> implemented
Perhaps we add another section? Obsolete is wrong, but maybe "background reading"?

For simplicity, call it approved then?

Cheers
Sven

Lukács T. Berki

unread,
Mar 31, 2023, 4:31:20 AM3/31/23
to ツ Sven Tiffe, Tony Aiuto, bazel-dev
On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 5:01 PM ツ Sven Tiffe <sti...@google.com> wrote:
On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 4:44 PM 'Tony Aiuto' via bazel-dev <baze...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
 
I still think it's the right idea for helping with I18N of error codes, but the bikeshedding headwind was strong. It was not a high enough priority to fight. "Deferred" as a new category?

My suggestion would be that if so far this has not gotten attention/traction, close it for the time being and reopen it if the time is right? That is the same thing as deferring, but we avoid keeping old proposals open forever (which I assume is one motivation for Lukacs to do the cleanup and which is something we are trying to achieve with old PRs as well). 
Yep, I agree. Dropped proposals can be reopened at any time. Sent out https://github.com/bazelbuild/proposals/pull/306/ to drop it.

@Tony: if you feel strongly, we can create a "Deferred" category (vdye@'s "Dependency adapters" doc was another candidate for this), but all things being equal, I'd rather keep our process simple.
 
It's not really a design. It's more of a "read me first" before trying to design or implement anything. That does not fit the model of "draft -> review -> approved|rejected -> implemented
Perhaps we add another section? Obsolete is wrong, but maybe "background reading"?

For simplicity, call it approved then?
Let's delete it then? This repository is not about readmes, it's about proposals that need to be discussed then decided. I sent out https://github.com/bazelbuild/proposals/pull/305 to this effect.

I also sent out https://github.com/bazelbuild/proposals/pull/304 to mark the other two as "Implemented" and "Approved", respectively. 


Cheers
Sven

Tony Aiuto

unread,
Mar 31, 2023, 2:44:30 PM3/31/23
to Lukács T. Berki, ツ Sven Tiffe, bazel-dev
All sounds good.

--
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/CAOu%2B0LW414OKa0mfvw%2BC6_uG5RHom-VEeEurcRaf7wOHr_TABg%40mail.gmail.com.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages