Overall +1 and feels reasonable. PEX is just a packaging and doesn't affect real behavior.
On the other hand, I am nervous about Bazel's stability/compatibility. Do we have the steps to try the official rules and see the errors we get? On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 7:25 PM H W <[email protected]> wrote: > The current pex-bazel-rule looks like an old version and has not been > updated for a while. Meanwhile the Bazel official Python rule looks more > mature these years. As far as I can tell, the pros of keeping Pex is that > it aligns Pex standard. If we did not need to align to the Pex standard, we > may choose the Bazel official Python rule, which not only makes the Bazel > building process easier, aligning to the Bazel ecosystem but also reduces > the Pex rule in Heron maintenance effort. From the Heron developer > perspective, Heron just needs a Python binary packaging rule no matter > whether the packaging is Pex or some other format. From a user perspective, > users do not care what Python packaging format Heron internal uses. > > +1 `cut over to the official Python rules` > > On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 8:25 AM Josh Fischer <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi All, > > > > I'm looking into this Python upgrade that is needed to fix the darwin > > build. I'm trying to update the deps and fix our custom pex rules. > While > > my Python knowledge is minimal, I'm wondering how much we are going > > against the grain using these rules instead of the official supported > > Python rules by the Bazel team. > > > > https://docs.bazel.build/versions/master/be/python.html > > > > I know that upgrades for Python have been troublesome in the past. I'm > > wondering if it's worth trying to cut over to the official Python rules? > > > > Thoughts, criticism and whatever else is much appreciated. > > > > - Josh > > >
