bazel-contrib / bazel-contrib/rules_scala
Is the manifest class-path good enough?
- Dominant language
- Starlark
- Stars
- 384
- Forks
- 292
- Avg merge
- 2d 22h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 47
Description
Hi,
More questions from grokking through the code :)
In `def _write_manifest(ctx):` you wrote `# TODO(bazel-team): I don't think this classpath is what you want`.
I tracked it down to this [gerrit review](https://bazel-review.googlesource.com/#/c/2410/) where you said that you wrote this since you
`... assume the classpath is much larger than that, i.e. your dependencies too. I left this here because it mirrors the super simple existing rule, but I am not sure this works for a larger projects with more dependencies.`
Do you still think so?
Contributor guide
Research direction
Start by reading the _write_manifest(ctx) implementation and the referenced Gerrit review at change 2410. Trace how the manifest classpath is assembled for dependencies, then determine whether the existing behavior covers larger projects; done means reaching and documenting a clear correctness decision.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- scala
- Domain
- build-system
- Issue type
- Bug
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100