Bazel custom rules (tools/rules)

[Nicholas Nezis <ni...@gmail.com>]

Can I start a thread for a quick discussion about Bazel? I apologize if
this is a silly question. I'm new to Bazel.

I'm curious why there are so many custom rules defined in the Heron repo
(tools/rules). I see Bazel provided rules that we could leverage for things
like JarJar and Javadoc and Python, etc. Are there specific reasons why
there is custom logic in the Heron repo? Or was it maybe historical because
the Bazel provided resources didn't exist at the time? I was looking at
upgrading our use of Bazel to 1.X. Upgrading our custom logic seem harder
than upgrading a version of a Bazel provided rules dependency.

Thanks,
Nick

Re: Bazel custom rules (tools/rules)

[Josh Fischer <jo...@joshfischer.io>]

I was looking at the JetBrains Bazel plugin this morning.  It looks like
they do not plan to support C/C++.  I'm sure how well this would work for
us.  https://ij.bazel.build/docs/bazel-support.html

On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 4:55 PM Ning Wang <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:

> agreed 2
>
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 2:49 PM SiMing Weng <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > One thing I really would like to see happening is a better/simpler IDE
> > support, maybe via the the Google Jetbrains Bazel Plugin <
> > https://ij.bazel.build/>. I knew we had a shell script to generate
> > IntelliJ “.iml” file, but it seems no longer working.
> >
> > I know from CI point of view, IDE support doesn’t seem important, but a
> > better developer experience/productivity is going to help drive the
> > interest from the community.
> >
> > > On Jan 17, 2020, at 5:22 PM, Ning Wang <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > agreed
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 11:45 AM Josh Fischer <jo...@joshfischer.io>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> I think that most of the rules that Bazel comes with now did not exist
> > when
> > >> Heron was under its core development cycles. Now when it comes to
> > upgrading
> > >> Bazel I would ask the dev@ for feedback if you have to make a
> decision
> > on
> > >> what is the best way to go, offering your perspective as well.  If you
> > feel
> > >> that it is simpler to remove some custom rule implementations then I
> > would
> > >> make your case write a proposal and send it off to dev@ to get
> feedback
> > >> and
> > >> support on the issue.  I think it's safe to say we are all looking
> for a
> > >> simpler  way to manage the Bazel build rules within the Heron code
> base
> > and
> > >> we would be happy to get suggestions or feedback on any of our current
> > >> Bazel usage/implementation today.
> > >>
> > >> - Josh
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 12:19 PM Ning Wang <wa...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> My feeling is that, Bazel moves fast. When Heron was started, Bazel
> was
> > >>> still young (4+ years ago) and many tasks have to be done via custom
> > >> rules.
> > >>> And when upgrading Bazel, it is often not backward compatible .....
> so
> > >> the
> > >>> effort is to fix the build, not clean it up.
> > >>>
> > >>> However I was not in the team when the project started. Karthik,
> > Sanjeev,
> > >>> Maosong, Neng, Huijun should have more information.
> > >>>
> > >>> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 6:37 AM Nicholas Nezis <
> > nicholas.nezis@gmail.com
> > >>>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Can I start a thread for a quick discussion about Bazel? I apologize
> > if
> > >>>> this is a silly question. I'm new to Bazel.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I'm curious why there are so many custom rules defined in the Heron
> > >> repo
> > >>>> (tools/rules). I see Bazel provided rules that we could leverage for
> > >>> things
> > >>>> like JarJar and Javadoc and Python, etc. Are there specific reasons
> > why
> > >>>> there is custom logic in the Heron repo? Or was it maybe historical
> > >>> because
> > >>>> the Bazel provided resources didn't exist at the time? I was looking
> > at
> > >>>> upgrading our use of Bazel to 1.X. Upgrading our custom logic seem
> > >> harder
> > >>>> than upgrading a version of a Bazel provided rules dependency.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Thanks,
> > >>>> Nick
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
> >
>

Re: Bazel custom rules (tools/rules)

[Ning Wang <wa...@gmail.com>]

agreed 2

On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 2:49 PM SiMing Weng <si...@gmail.com> wrote:

> One thing I really would like to see happening is a better/simpler IDE
> support, maybe via the the Google Jetbrains Bazel Plugin <
> https://ij.bazel.build/>. I knew we had a shell script to generate
> IntelliJ “.iml” file, but it seems no longer working.
>
> I know from CI point of view, IDE support doesn’t seem important, but a
> better developer experience/productivity is going to help drive the
> interest from the community.
>
> > On Jan 17, 2020, at 5:22 PM, Ning Wang <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > agreed
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 11:45 AM Josh Fischer <jo...@joshfischer.io>
> wrote:
> >
> >> I think that most of the rules that Bazel comes with now did not exist
> when
> >> Heron was under its core development cycles. Now when it comes to
> upgrading
> >> Bazel I would ask the dev@ for feedback if you have to make a decision
> on
> >> what is the best way to go, offering your perspective as well.  If you
> feel
> >> that it is simpler to remove some custom rule implementations then I
> would
> >> make your case write a proposal and send it off to dev@ to get feedback
> >> and
> >> support on the issue.  I think it's safe to say we are all looking for a
> >> simpler  way to manage the Bazel build rules within the Heron code base
> and
> >> we would be happy to get suggestions or feedback on any of our current
> >> Bazel usage/implementation today.
> >>
> >> - Josh
> >>
> >> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 12:19 PM Ning Wang <wa...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> My feeling is that, Bazel moves fast. When Heron was started, Bazel was
> >>> still young (4+ years ago) and many tasks have to be done via custom
> >> rules.
> >>> And when upgrading Bazel, it is often not backward compatible ..... so
> >> the
> >>> effort is to fix the build, not clean it up.
> >>>
> >>> However I was not in the team when the project started. Karthik,
> Sanjeev,
> >>> Maosong, Neng, Huijun should have more information.
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 6:37 AM Nicholas Nezis <
> nicholas.nezis@gmail.com
> >>>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Can I start a thread for a quick discussion about Bazel? I apologize
> if
> >>>> this is a silly question. I'm new to Bazel.
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm curious why there are so many custom rules defined in the Heron
> >> repo
> >>>> (tools/rules). I see Bazel provided rules that we could leverage for
> >>> things
> >>>> like JarJar and Javadoc and Python, etc. Are there specific reasons
> why
> >>>> there is custom logic in the Heron repo? Or was it maybe historical
> >>> because
> >>>> the Bazel provided resources didn't exist at the time? I was looking
> at
> >>>> upgrading our use of Bazel to 1.X. Upgrading our custom logic seem
> >> harder
> >>>> than upgrading a version of a Bazel provided rules dependency.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> Nick
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
>
>

Re: Bazel custom rules (tools/rules)

[SiMing Weng <si...@gmail.com>]

One thing I really would like to see happening is a better/simpler IDE support, maybe via the the Google Jetbrains Bazel Plugin <https://ij.bazel.build/>. I knew we had a shell script to generate IntelliJ “.iml” file, but it seems no longer working.

I know from CI point of view, IDE support doesn’t seem important, but a better developer experience/productivity is going to help drive the interest from the community.

> On Jan 17, 2020, at 5:22 PM, Ning Wang <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> agreed
> 
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 11:45 AM Josh Fischer <jo...@joshfischer.io> wrote:
> 
>> I think that most of the rules that Bazel comes with now did not exist when
>> Heron was under its core development cycles. Now when it comes to upgrading
>> Bazel I would ask the dev@ for feedback if you have to make a decision on
>> what is the best way to go, offering your perspective as well.  If you feel
>> that it is simpler to remove some custom rule implementations then I would
>> make your case write a proposal and send it off to dev@ to get feedback
>> and
>> support on the issue.  I think it's safe to say we are all looking for a
>> simpler  way to manage the Bazel build rules within the Heron code base and
>> we would be happy to get suggestions or feedback on any of our current
>> Bazel usage/implementation today.
>> 
>> - Josh
>> 
>> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 12:19 PM Ning Wang <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> My feeling is that, Bazel moves fast. When Heron was started, Bazel was
>>> still young (4+ years ago) and many tasks have to be done via custom
>> rules.
>>> And when upgrading Bazel, it is often not backward compatible ..... so
>> the
>>> effort is to fix the build, not clean it up.
>>> 
>>> However I was not in the team when the project started. Karthik, Sanjeev,
>>> Maosong, Neng, Huijun should have more information.
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 6:37 AM Nicholas Nezis <nicholas.nezis@gmail.com
>>> 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Can I start a thread for a quick discussion about Bazel? I apologize if
>>>> this is a silly question. I'm new to Bazel.
>>>> 
>>>> I'm curious why there are so many custom rules defined in the Heron
>> repo
>>>> (tools/rules). I see Bazel provided rules that we could leverage for
>>> things
>>>> like JarJar and Javadoc and Python, etc. Are there specific reasons why
>>>> there is custom logic in the Heron repo? Or was it maybe historical
>>> because
>>>> the Bazel provided resources didn't exist at the time? I was looking at
>>>> upgrading our use of Bazel to 1.X. Upgrading our custom logic seem
>> harder
>>>> than upgrading a version of a Bazel provided rules dependency.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Nick
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 

Re: Bazel custom rules (tools/rules)

[Ning Wang <wa...@gmail.com>]

agreed

On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 11:45 AM Josh Fischer <jo...@joshfischer.io> wrote:

> I think that most of the rules that Bazel comes with now did not exist when
> Heron was under its core development cycles. Now when it comes to upgrading
> Bazel I would ask the dev@ for feedback if you have to make a decision on
> what is the best way to go, offering your perspective as well.  If you feel
> that it is simpler to remove some custom rule implementations then I would
> make your case write a proposal and send it off to dev@ to get feedback
> and
> support on the issue.  I think it's safe to say we are all looking for a
> simpler  way to manage the Bazel build rules within the Heron code base and
> we would be happy to get suggestions or feedback on any of our current
> Bazel usage/implementation today.
>
> - Josh
>
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 12:19 PM Ning Wang <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > My feeling is that, Bazel moves fast. When Heron was started, Bazel was
> > still young (4+ years ago) and many tasks have to be done via custom
> rules.
> > And when upgrading Bazel, it is often not backward compatible ..... so
> the
> > effort is to fix the build, not clean it up.
> >
> > However I was not in the team when the project started. Karthik, Sanjeev,
> > Maosong, Neng, Huijun should have more information.
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 6:37 AM Nicholas Nezis <nicholas.nezis@gmail.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Can I start a thread for a quick discussion about Bazel? I apologize if
> > > this is a silly question. I'm new to Bazel.
> > >
> > > I'm curious why there are so many custom rules defined in the Heron
> repo
> > > (tools/rules). I see Bazel provided rules that we could leverage for
> > things
> > > like JarJar and Javadoc and Python, etc. Are there specific reasons why
> > > there is custom logic in the Heron repo? Or was it maybe historical
> > because
> > > the Bazel provided resources didn't exist at the time? I was looking at
> > > upgrading our use of Bazel to 1.X. Upgrading our custom logic seem
> harder
> > > than upgrading a version of a Bazel provided rules dependency.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Nick
> > >
> >
>

Re: Bazel custom rules (tools/rules)

[Josh Fischer <jo...@joshfischer.io>]

I think that most of the rules that Bazel comes with now did not exist when
Heron was under its core development cycles. Now when it comes to upgrading
Bazel I would ask the dev@ for feedback if you have to make a decision on
what is the best way to go, offering your perspective as well.  If you feel
that it is simpler to remove some custom rule implementations then I would
make your case write a proposal and send it off to dev@ to get feedback and
support on the issue.  I think it's safe to say we are all looking for a
simpler  way to manage the Bazel build rules within the Heron code base and
we would be happy to get suggestions or feedback on any of our current
Bazel usage/implementation today.

- Josh

On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 12:19 PM Ning Wang <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:

> My feeling is that, Bazel moves fast. When Heron was started, Bazel was
> still young (4+ years ago) and many tasks have to be done via custom rules.
> And when upgrading Bazel, it is often not backward compatible ..... so the
> effort is to fix the build, not clean it up.
>
> However I was not in the team when the project started. Karthik, Sanjeev,
> Maosong, Neng, Huijun should have more information.
>
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 6:37 AM Nicholas Nezis <ni...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Can I start a thread for a quick discussion about Bazel? I apologize if
> > this is a silly question. I'm new to Bazel.
> >
> > I'm curious why there are so many custom rules defined in the Heron repo
> > (tools/rules). I see Bazel provided rules that we could leverage for
> things
> > like JarJar and Javadoc and Python, etc. Are there specific reasons why
> > there is custom logic in the Heron repo? Or was it maybe historical
> because
> > the Bazel provided resources didn't exist at the time? I was looking at
> > upgrading our use of Bazel to 1.X. Upgrading our custom logic seem harder
> > than upgrading a version of a Bazel provided rules dependency.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Nick
> >
>

Re: Bazel custom rules (tools/rules)

[Ning Wang <wa...@gmail.com>]

My feeling is that, Bazel moves fast. When Heron was started, Bazel was
still young (4+ years ago) and many tasks have to be done via custom rules.
And when upgrading Bazel, it is often not backward compatible ..... so the
effort is to fix the build, not clean it up.

However I was not in the team when the project started. Karthik, Sanjeev,
Maosong, Neng, Huijun should have more information.

On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 6:37 AM Nicholas Nezis <ni...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Can I start a thread for a quick discussion about Bazel? I apologize if
> this is a silly question. I'm new to Bazel.
>
> I'm curious why there are so many custom rules defined in the Heron repo
> (tools/rules). I see Bazel provided rules that we could leverage for things
> like JarJar and Javadoc and Python, etc. Are there specific reasons why
> there is custom logic in the Heron repo? Or was it maybe historical because
> the Bazel provided resources didn't exist at the time? I was looking at
> upgrading our use of Bazel to 1.X. Upgrading our custom logic seem harder
> than upgrading a version of a Bazel provided rules dependency.
>
> Thanks,
> Nick
>