Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Provide a way of packaging separate layers into Java container after deprecation of rules_docker #160

Open
C0mbatwombat opened this issue Dec 12, 2023 · 3 comments
Labels
P3 We're not considering to work on this, but happy to review a PR. (No assignee)

Comments

@C0mbatwombat
Copy link

(It feels awkward to ask this question here, but it is a follow-up of this suggestion over at rules_oci )

As the maintainers have decided that the rules_oci repository should remain language agnostic, it is quite unclear where to go with questions for language-specific containers, so following @alexeagle 's advice I am trying over here.

I would like to migrate from rules_docker to rules_oci, but the functionality to package depsets into separate layers has not been provided by the new rules (_jar_app_layer_impl ).

Would it be possible to provide similar functionality in a .defs file in this repository, and could someone help me out in porting it?

@C0mbatwombat C0mbatwombat changed the title Provide example of packaging separate layers into Java container after deprecation of rules_docker Provide a way of packaging separate layers into Java container after deprecation of rules_docker Dec 12, 2023
@SanjayVas
Copy link

Related logic from rules_java (once these parts are actually migrated to Starlark) that was replicated in jar_app_layer was handling runfiles and native libraries.

@C0mbatwombat
Copy link
Author

Hi @SanjayVas thanks for your reply, do I understand correctly that you are planning to migrate the functionality to rules_java?

@SanjayVas
Copy link

do I understand correctly that you are planning to migrate the functionality to rules_java?

No. I'm not a contributor to rules_java. I'm just sharing some context for why this likely needs to be solved in rules_java instead of downstream.

@hvadehra hvadehra added the P3 We're not considering to work on this, but happy to review a PR. (No assignee) label Jan 16, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
P3 We're not considering to work on this, but happy to review a PR. (No assignee)
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants