Is this project dead?

[virusdave]

Apologies for using an Issue for this question. It seems like activity has stopped, whereas the more official rules_scala is still undergoing active development. However, this package has some niceties that that one does not, such as support for multiple scala versions. I'd really like that, but if this ruleset is effectively dead or stopped, then I'd rather not start down the road that leads to a painful migration later.

Thanks!

[SrodriguezO]

Hey @virusdave,

We're still using higherkindness/rules_scala, but we're planning on migrating back to bazelbuild/rules_scala once we find the bandwidth to do so. Now that bazelbuild/rules_scala supports phases, we can meet our use case there too.

In the meantime, we'll continue doing maintenance work on higherkindness (fixing bugs, updating Bazel periodically, etc.), but we won't be doing further development.

You're welcome to use higherkindness, but keep in mind that the repo is essentially in maintenance mode atm. Have you considered asking about mutliple Scala versions in bazelbuild/rules_scala? Are there other features from this project you'd miss in the bazelbuild one?

[virusdave]

Multiple versions is the big one, as it makes upgrading a massive codebase incrementally realistic.

The zinc support is kind of nice I suppose, but i don't actually care all that much about it.

OK thanks - i'll bring it up there i guess, and start a migration before i get myself too deep! :)

[pauldraper]

The intention always was to ideally merge back with rules_scala.

rules_scala was difficult to work with (technically and otherwise) and innovate, so this was a proving grounds for a better rules_scala.

Frankly, I think rules_scala is still really clumsy and handcuffed to backwards compatibility concerns, and this higherkindness still beats it in many ways.

Unfortunately, the doc comparing the two got removed, but you can look at the differences as of July 2019 here:

https://github.com/higherkindness/rules_scala/blob/d601e60da20e475136d96257bb192a9c3130e42d/docs/newdocs/diff_rules_scala.md

^ Many of those issues solved by higherkindness are still open in rules_scala, years later.

[fedefernandez]

I'm bumping this again as a member of this organization. Is it possible to archive this repo and add a notice in the readme? Happy to do it by myself but since I haven't worked on this project I need some green light from the owners/contributos. I think it's a good idea to make it clear this is not active so people new to bazel don't get confused.

[andyscott]

I'm totally fine with us archiving the repo. I think the only continued use of this project is perhaps by Lucid Chart (https://github.com/lucidsoftware/rules_scala).

[pauldraper]

@jjudd @coreywoodfield, comments?

[jjudd]

I'm fine with archiving the higherkindness repo. We're still using this, so we don't intend to archive our fork. That being said, while our fork is open source, we're not really doing much these days to make sure it works for others besides us.