On Sat, Jan 2, 2021 at 12:00 PM Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <email@example.com
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?
You make a good point. Could you take your sentiments and put them into an issue on upstream's tracker?  If you tag me (olekw), I can point it out to my upstream contacts.
I think our goals here are fairly similar since I'm hoping to encourage upstream to embrace additional architectures by demonstrating on Debian's buildds that additional architectures build with little to no additional effort. (ppc64, ppc64el, and s390x so far) I was hoping that if we could get mips64el and risc-v to also build with (hopefully) minor tweaks, it would make a strong argument to support them as well. I always try to look at situations from another person's perspective and asking upstream to expend an unknown amount of resources to support something that (based on this thread) may not even be desired is a tough proposition.
It doesn't hurt to ask but I personally prefer approaching people outside Debian with a solution in-hand as opposed to a request for help. Within our community, where we're all just doing our best to improve Free/Libre software for our users, I'm (obviously) comfortable both requesting and offering help for that goal.