You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Not sure if there is a technical reason for the separate namespaces. But I think that the second one is easier to understand and feels overall a little bit cleaner.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The technical reason behind this is that for every crate in the dependency graph, we generate an http_archive rule and the corresponding BUILD file to build the crate. I don't think there is an easy way around that.
What we could do however is make the names of these http_archives an implementation detail, and expose the crates via a dedicated workspace (in your example it would be called blackjack) that contains aliases to the actual crates, exposing them under convenient names such as @blackjack//:cargo_lock.
I'm not sure how we would set up a workspace like that, maybe with a repository rule?
Currently, each crate has its own namespace defined. Although the prefix can be set, the crate name has to be appended to it.
Would it be possible to somehow make it that all crates have the same namespace? E.g.:
Not sure if there is a technical reason for the separate namespaces. But I think that the second one is easier to understand and feels overall a little bit cleaner.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: