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

Modularize rules_nixpkgs #181

Open
3 of 8 tasks
aherrmann opened this issue Jan 28, 2022 · 0 comments
Open
3 of 8 tasks

Modularize rules_nixpkgs #181

aherrmann opened this issue Jan 28, 2022 · 0 comments
Labels
P2 major: an upcoming release type: feature request

Comments

@aherrmann
Copy link
Member

aherrmann commented Jan 28, 2022

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

Bazel 5.0 introduces a new dependency management system called "bzlmod", introduced in this talk. In that system, Bazel modules need to define metadata about themselves and their dependencies in a MODULE.bazel file and be registered in the Bazel Central Registry.

With Bazel 6, bzlmod became generally available (needs to be enabled with --enable_bzlmod). In Bazel version 5.0 it is introduced as an experimental feature.

As of now, rules_nixpkgs is not compatible with this new module system.

Describe the solution you'd like

Additional context

The rule author SIG has a discussion about bzlmod here.
The following blog posts may be useful resources for this work:

@aherrmann aherrmann added the P2 major: an upcoming release label Feb 8, 2022
fricklerhandwerk added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 16, 2022
ideally we would already operate within `bzlmod` here, but we do not
even have all dependencies present in [BCR][bcr] as of today. it is
another can of worms detailed in [#181][181].

here we just isolate `rules_nixpkgs_core` as a proper self-contained
repository as far as possible.

[bcr]: https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel-central-registry/tree/92bb87fc41d549a47297af67c4135111308b7b03
[181]: #181
fricklerhandwerk added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 17, 2022
ideally we would already operate within `bzlmod` here, but we do not
even have all dependencies present in [BCR][bcr] as of today. it is
another can of worms detailed in [#181][181].

here we just isolate `rules_nixpkgs_core` as a proper self-contained
repository as far as possible.

[bcr]: https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel-central-registry/tree/92bb87fc41d549a47297af67c4135111308b7b03
[181]: #181
fricklerhandwerk added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 17, 2022
ideally we would already operate within `bzlmod` here, but we do not
even have all dependencies present in [BCR][bcr] as of today. it is
another can of worms detailed in [#181][181].

here we just isolate `rules_nixpkgs_core` as a proper self-contained
repository as far as possible.

[bcr]: https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel-central-registry/tree/92bb87fc41d549a47297af67c4135111308b7b03
[181]: #181
fricklerhandwerk added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 17, 2022
ideally we would already operate within `bzlmod` here, but we do not
even have all dependencies present in [BCR][bcr] as of today. it is
another can of worms detailed in [#181][181].

here we just isolate `rules_nixpkgs_core` as a proper self-contained
repository as far as possible.

[bcr]: https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel-central-registry/tree/92bb87fc41d549a47297af67c4135111308b7b03
[181]: #181
fricklerhandwerk added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 21, 2022
ideally we would already operate within `bzlmod` here, but we do not
even have all dependencies present in [BCR][bcr] as of today. it is
another can of worms detailed in [#181][181].

here we just isolate `rules_nixpkgs_core` as a proper self-contained
repository as far as possible.

[bcr]: https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel-central-registry/tree/92bb87fc41d549a47297af67c4135111308b7b03
[181]: #181
fricklerhandwerk added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 21, 2022
ideally we would already operate within `bzlmod` here, but we do not
even have all dependencies present in [BCR][bcr] as of today. it is
another can of worms detailed in [#181][181].

here we just isolate `rules_nixpkgs_core` as a proper self-contained
repository as far as possible.

[bcr]: https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel-central-registry/tree/92bb87fc41d549a47297af67c4135111308b7b03
[181]: #181
fricklerhandwerk added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 22, 2022
ideally we would already operate within `bzlmod` here, but we do not
even have all dependencies present in [BCR][bcr] as of today. it is
another can of worms detailed in [#181][181].

here we just isolate `rules_nixpkgs_core` as a proper self-contained
repository as far as possible.

[bcr]: https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel-central-registry/tree/92bb87fc41d549a47297af67c4135111308b7b03
[181]: #181
fricklerhandwerk added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 24, 2022
ideally we would already operate within `bzlmod` here, but we do not
even have all dependencies present in [BCR][bcr] as of today. it is
another can of worms detailed in [#181][181].

here we just isolate `rules_nixpkgs_core` as a proper self-contained
repository as far as possible.

[bcr]: https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel-central-registry/tree/92bb87fc41d549a47297af67c4135111308b7b03
[181]: #181
fricklerhandwerk added a commit that referenced this issue Apr 1, 2022
ideally we would already operate within `bzlmod` here, but we do not
even have all dependencies present in [BCR][bcr] as of today. it is
another can of worms detailed in [#181][181].

here we just isolate `rules_nixpkgs_core` as a proper self-contained
repository as far as possible.

[bcr]: https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel-central-registry/tree/92bb87fc41d549a47297af67c4135111308b7b03
[181]: #181
@aherrmann aherrmann self-assigned this Jan 30, 2023
@aherrmann aherrmann moved this to In Progress in rules_nixpkgs May 25, 2023
@aherrmann aherrmann removed their assignment Feb 12, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
P2 major: an upcoming release type: feature request
Projects
Status: In Progress
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant