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

Reintroduce implicit_compile_deps #1109

Conversation

purkhusid
Copy link

Why

Reverts #801

Why

ScalaPB features like extra imports and type mappers don't work with the current implementation of scala_proto_library.
This adds back implicit_compile_deps tha allows the user to add extra implicit dependencies added to all scala_proto_library targets.

How

Reverted some of the changes in #801. This should work with the latest versions of Bazel since toolchain transitions have been introduced.

This is not the ideal solution since changes to theses dependencies will trigger a rebuild of all the proto targets.

But it can be an escape hatch for people already using these features and are looking to migrate to Bazel.

Reverts bazelbuild#801

ScalaPB features like extra imports and type mappers don't work with the current implementation of scala_proto_library.
This adds back `implicit_compile_deps` tha allows the user to add extra implicit dependencies added to all scala_proto_library targets.

Reverted some of the changes in bazelbuild#801. This should work with the latest versions of Bazel since toolchain transitions have been introduced.

This is not the ideal solution since changes to theses dependencies will trigger a rebuild of all the proto targets.

But it can be an escape hatch for people already using these features and are looking to migrate to Bazel.
@liucijus
Copy link
Collaborator

There's a similar work related to proto toolchains and ability to specify custom deps via toolchain here #1104 . But it's blocked by lack of execution transitions support in older bazel versions.

@purkhusid
Copy link
Author

Closing in favour of #1104

@purkhusid purkhusid closed this Sep 18, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants