Skip to content

wip: upgrade stardoc and protobuf to restore Bazel HEAD CI#1462

Closed
aaronsky wants to merge 1 commit intobazelbuild:masterfrom
aaronsky:aaronsky/restore-bazel-head-ci
Closed

wip: upgrade stardoc and protobuf to restore Bazel HEAD CI#1462
aaronsky wants to merge 1 commit intobazelbuild:masterfrom
aaronsky:aaronsky/restore-bazel-head-ci

Conversation

@aaronsky
Copy link
Contributor

Trying my hand at this, to improve personal competency. This updates the minimum protobuf to 29.0, removes the dependency on rules_proto, and updates stardoc to 0.7.2. Some or all of this may be an overreach, but I'm unfamiliar with the constraints.

@aaronsky
Copy link
Contributor Author

alternative approach to bumping up protobuf so much would be to pin to rules_proto 7.0.2


<pre>
derive_swift_module_name(<a href="#derive_swift_module_name-args">args</a>)
load("@rules_swift//doc:doc.bzl", "derive_swift_module_name")
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ugh, this is annoying.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The main annoying thing is doc.bzl versus where it actually is 😕.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

is this something we should bring up in the stardoc repo as a bug? or maybe there's another way we're supposed to be organizing these?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could probably use a full issue. I saw it mentioned in a comment here: bazelbuild/stardoc#94 (comment)

I think we need to go the route of concatenating the output instead.

@brentleyjones
Copy link
Collaborator

alternative approach to bumping up protobuf so much would be to pin to rules_proto 7.0.2

Pros and cons of these approaches? Could the protobuf bump break people that depend on us?

@aaronsky
Copy link
Contributor Author

aaronsky commented Dec 2, 2024

I'm not super-clued into the goings-on around rules_proto/protobuf, but I saw after writing that comment that stardoc 0.7.2 declares a dep on protobuf 29.0. So I think it might be a moot point.

@keith
Copy link
Member

keith commented Dec 6, 2024

we could probably pull in a patch to revert bazelbuild/stardoc#216 to avoid the load issues

@aaronsky aaronsky closed this Jan 17, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants