Use multirun

[alexeagle]

This has the side-effect of making a formatter binary per-language, which was one of our design review outcomes, since Aspect Workflows might want to be able to run them individually or in parallel.

FYI @keith since it's taking a dependency on your repo

Also now formats-in-parallel using the jobs attribute of multirun.

Type of change

• Refactor (a code change that neither fixes a bug or adds a new feature)

For changes visible to end-users

• Breaking change (this change will force users to change their own code or config)

multi_formatter_binary is renamed to format_multirun and some attributes were renamed:

• sh is now shell
• protobuf is now protocol_buffer.

Test plan

• Covered by existing test cases

[keith]

awesome!

[alexeagle]

This introduces a dep on rules_python, purely to run a py_binary. We kinda hate that so adding @thesayyn to make any alternative suggestions :)

[thesayyn]

my take on this is that since we don't allow users to pass args per binary like multirun, we can get away with a simple bash script it seems... i don't like rules_python dependency here, eventhough it's indirect.

[alexeagle]

Simple bash script cannot run the tools in parallel without interleaving their stdouts though. So we need something more.