protobuf
protobuf copied to clipboard
protocolbuffers
Using `maven` as the repo name causes duplicate warnings when using bzlmod
Downstream bug in rules_jvm_external: https://github.com/bazelbuild/rules_jvm_external/issues/916
What version of protobuf and what language are you using?
v23.1
What did you expect to see
A clean build when using bzlmod.
What did you see instead?
DEBUG: $TMP/external/rules_jvm_external~/private/extensions/maven.bzl:154:14:
The maven repository 'maven' is used in two different bazel modules,
originally in '<my_workspace>' and now in 'protobuf'
Summarizing @shs96c in https://github.com/bazelbuild/rules_jvm_external/issues/916#issuecomment-1645527584
The common maven repo name allows rulesets to contribute to the user's JARs. However, this implies that maven is for the end user, not for transitive dependencies. If a ruleset needs private dependencies, it should use a custom namespace rather than the maven namespace.
- rules_jvm_external uses rules_jvm_external_deps instead of
maven. - rules_kotlin uses kotlin_rules_maven instead of
maven.
Proposed fixes
There are a few ways to fix the logline:
- Patch protobuf in the Bazel Central Registry rewrite
maventoprotobuf_maven. - Modify the protobuf repo to rewrite
maventoprotobuf_maven. - Fetch the JARs manually without using Maven or rules_jvm_external. Trims the dependency graph a fair bit.
I think 2 is the best short-term option. If you're open to it, I can send a PR.
Can this please be fixed in both the v3 and v4 protobuf libraries in Bazel Central?
I cannot find a way to rename the maven repository in our modules, because there needs to be a maven repository defined (somewhere), and I cannot see there are support for multiple maven repositories when using bzlmod (https://github.com/bazelbuild/rules_jvm_external/blob/master/docs/bzlmod.md).
@bnordli, assuming you're using bzlmod, the examples list by @jschaf show you how to create a "private" set of dependencies for protobuf. If you were to do this, you would require consumers of this ruleset to add the com.google.protobuf:protobuf-java version they need to their own maven_install or install.
use_extension also supports a new isolated parameter, which may also be useful if you're working on a root project.
It seems latest version of protobuf in bcr are not using maven anymore in bzlmod(I can still see it in the WORKSPACE) and it leads to other set of issues:
no such package '@@[unknown repo 'maven' requested from @@protobuf~]//': The repository '@@[unknown repo 'maven' requested from @@protobuf~]' could not be resolved: No repository visible as '@maven' from repository '@@protobuf~'
It seems latest version of protobuf in bcr are not using
mavenanymore inbzlmod(I can still see it in the WORKSPACE) and it leads to other set of issues:no such package '@@[unknown repo 'maven' requested from @@protobuf~]//': The repository '@@[unknown repo 'maven' requested from @@protobuf~]' could not be resolved: No repository visible as '@maven' from repository '@@protobuf~'
Can you open a separate issue with details?
@bnordli, assuming you're using
bzlmod, the examples list by @jschaf show you how to create a "private" set of dependencies forprotobuf. If you were to do this, you would require consumers of this ruleset to add thecom.google.protobuf:protobuf-javaversion they need to their ownmaven_installorinstall.
use_extensionalso supports a newisolatedparameter, which may also be useful if you're working on a root project.
@jschaf / @bnordli - did the suggestion from @shs96c work for you?
The isolate parameter is marked experimental with a strong warning not to depend on it. I think using one of the alternatives in the first comment is a better approach.
Experimental. This parameter is experimental and may change at any time. Please do not depend on it. It may be enabled on an experimental basis by setting --experimental_isolated_extension_usages