Add @rules_license style license declarations#508
Conversation
This is a little more unweildy than we would like, in that we hand add them to each BUILD file. This should be enforced with a test, but it should be a non-Bazel test at the source code level.
|
cc: @danielmachlab |
nacl
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The idea seems sound, but the question I'm wondering about is how this would be propagated to the other bazelbuild projects.
I don't deeply mind being the first one to consume rules_license, but I'm wary because the API might change and have ripple effects on downstream consumers.
See suggestions below.
danielmachlab
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hi Tony, besides Andrew's comments, the changes you made look good to me. Just left one question
nacl
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM, given the discussion.
The new dependency on rules_license should be documented in the release notes. We might need a tag for that.
|
About being the first adopter: Yes. Since I am doing development on both rules, it is easier to quickly rev and iron out things before other teams start. About possible changes: The API for license users is intended to be strictly backwards compatible forever. For the most part, there should only be one This declares that I am using an Apache-2.0 license and the text of it is in the file LICENSE. There may be backwards compatible additions over time. The API for consuming these declarations to build audit trails and SBOMs will definitely change a lot in the next few months, but that will only impact organizations who want to establish their own audit policies. |
Add a first round of rules_license declarations to rules_pkg.
RELNOTES: New dependency on @rules_license.