-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.1k
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
or-tools should use released versions of pybind11_protobuf and pybind11_abseil #4204
Comments
related to:
|
Apparently, the mess is even greater than I have imagined:
So or-tools added a new, hard dependency in 9.7 which was a dead end already at that time ... These projects are all Google projects - do they even talk to each other? |
everybody is doing its best with his resources and priorities. Fixing pybind11 arcane dependencies it not high on that list. and upb is integrated in the protobuf code. |
I just fail to understand why making someone else live harder is seen as totally fine, instead of coming up with something working out of the box. There are plenty of people who have a hard time building pybind11_protobuf, and thus or-tools.
Which part is arcane? or-tools dependency on it is fairly new. pybind11_protobuf may use a "deprecated" API, but as there are no alternatives it should be considered recent.
It does not matter if upb is integrated in the protobuf code. It does not provide the required APIs needed for generating the bindings. And as long as or-tools is using pybind11_protobuf upb is just irrelevant. |
@lperron Can you tell us why this was closed? None of the mentioned issues have been addressed. |
Won:t fix.
I have no way of changing any of this.
Le mar. 4 juin 2024, 00:23, StefanBruens ***@***.***> a
écrit :
… @lperron <https://github.com/lperron> Can you tell us why this was
closed? None of the mentioned issues have been addressed.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#4204 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACUPL3OA7HLCXYKA6THMZDLZFTUFJAVCNFSM6AAAAABG3GCZSWVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDCNBWGIZDOMZRHE>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
@lperron - one first step would be to integrate back the patches carried here to both pybind11_abseil and pybind11_protobuf. |
Agreed. Not that simple.
Le jeu. 13 juin 2024, 03:00, StefanBruens ***@***.***> a
écrit :
… @lperron <https://github.com/lperron> - one first step would be to
integrate back the patches carried here to both pybind11_abseil and
pybind11_protobuf.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#4204 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACUPL3KDO2PXH7TJ7K4UVSDZHFUUBAVCNFSM6AAAAABG3GCZSWVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDCNRVGE4DONBYGA>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
I recently uploaded recent versions of There probably won't be tagged releases of these projects as no such process exists and there are no resources to create such a process. Nevertheless, the BCR will probably contain "important" snapshots. This is only about Bazel which is similar to what is used internally. I see a lot of patches concerning |
But not magic either. Went ahead and submitted patches for CMake builds to pybind11_protobuf. |
What process is needed? Tag a release, done. Importing fairly random revisions from github repositories is just a nightmare. If you just care for one (your) single downstream package this may seem to work fine. As soon as a package starts to pull in different versions of the same package via various dependencies, hell breaks loose. |
@StefanBruens what value does a tag with a random tag number on a random revision provide you in addition to the already unique revision? You seem to want something like semver with compatibility promises which requires a process to capture incompatibilities. Version resolution is handled by Bzlmod for you. |
@mering most OSS google projects use/provide a CMake based build (re2, protobuf, or-tools, googletest, benchmark, abseil-cpp) to integrate nicely with the oss distro package manager ecosystem -> bzlmod is off topic here.... Since we (google/or-tools) use |
Not everyone uses bzlmod (actually, hardly anyone outside of google does ...). |
Version: main/v9.9
Currently, both dependencies are pulled in using a "random" version from git.
Unfortunately, both projects have not released any version yet, but this would probably change when encouraged from a high profile, dependent project like or-tools.
In the past, the changing versions have already led to various build failures for or-tools itself. Depending on "official" versions would also make the dependencies more usable outside of or-tools, and reduce problems due to loading different versions of the python modules at the same time.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: