[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bazel build issue on RISC-V

On 1/2/21 5:17 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> ... for which they didn't get paid, yet the Corporation that created the
> software got plenty of profit.
> when this exploitation and spongeing stops, Olek, your desires, which are
> perfectly reasonable, will easily be met.

I don't think it should be considered exploitation it's just a waste of time
in my personal opinion.

I have been loosely following how Google is trying to push Bazel into LLVM,
after they already pushed in GN. Google internally can't even agree on a
build system, it seems.

> may i recommend contacting the Bazel team to point out the high strategic
> value of having stable cross-architecture debian packaging (by
> significantly increasing the reach), with a view to having them either take
> direct responsibility for fixing the packaging themselves (where it would
> then no longer be viewed as exploitation and spongeing) or to speak with
> their management to provide adequate sponsorship?

It's Google, they don't care. I have experienced that many time before and
I've always people seen wasting their time with these efforts.

> ultimately if the software proves its value and creates a large community
> ecosystem, then the chances become much higher that someone from that
> community will step forward and pick up Bazel stable maintenance even if
> google abandons it (like they have done so many times already).

There are already so many good build systems out there and most of them
don't require a Java runtime to run unlike Bazel. So I guess the community
won't be going the Bazel way.

> however during its early development, before it reaches that point?  yeah
> this is just not a reasonable expectation unless accompanied by adequate
> financial compensation.



 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaubitz@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-    GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913

Reply to: