Looks like this fails due to missing googleapis-common-protos[grpc]

(02:10:36) ERROR: /private/var/tmp/_bazel_buildkite/824a4042afe4624418ffa6a61b765b34/external/examples_extras/requirements.bzl:243:5: Traceback (most recent call last):
--
  | File "/Users/buildkite/builds/bk-imacpro-10/bazel/rules-python-python/examples/extras/BUILD", line 21
  | py_test(name = "extras_test", <3 more arguments>)
  | File "/Users/buildkite/builds/bk-imacpro-10/bazel/rules-python-python/examples/extras/BUILD", line 28, in py_test
  | requirement(<1 more arguments>)
  | File "/private/var/tmp/_bazel_buildkite/824a4042afe4624418ffa6a61b765b34/external/examples_extras/requirements.bzl", line 243, in requirement
  | fail(<1 more arguments>)
  | Could not find pip-provided dependency: 'googleapis-common-protos[grpc]'

This looks to be due to the wheel version upgrade removing support for metadata.json pypa/wheel#195

This PR fixed my issues with Tensorflow and didn't introduce any regressions fwiw. How do we get a reviewer?

Any update on this? This PR fixes several packages for us. Currently unable to use rules_python without this.

How does this pass the test on version check? This PR does not touch the line to assert for Pip version 9.0.3:

yet CI says:

//examples/version:version_test (cached) PASSED in 0.2s

Since there seems to be some activity ongoing on this repo again, could one of the PRs be merged that supports METADATA parsing? This fix solves a lot of issues that are persistently raised around rules_python.
@brandjon @lberki

@brandjon @samschlegel

Would you be able to provide some timeline for when you might be able to resolve conflicts / review and merge this PR? I'm content w/ the prescribed workaround but it would be awesome if I didn't have to list out all the transitive deps of a package. Cheers! 🍻

I've rebased! For what it's worth we ended up moving to https://github.com/dillon-giacoppo/rules_python_external

So will this be merged? Or am I supposed to use rules_python_external?

• I don't (really) want to rely on dillon-giacoppo/rules_python_external for a while and then have to switch back
• If dillon-giacoppo/rules_python_external is gonna be the solution, then README.md should be updated.

On a side note, do I still need this change if I simply always have a transitively-closed requirements.txt?

Hey @dayfine,

I maintain rules_python_external (alongside @dillon-giacoppo) and have recently become a maintainer here.

The relationship between rules_python and rules_python_external is of immediate concern to the community, but the recently added maintainers need some time build a working relationship and discuss next steps.

If rules_python_external solves an immediate problem you're having, I'd recommend using it. Where it is the solution will be answered ASAP.

On a side note, do I still need this...

This change is affecting how the requirement(X) targets get created, so I think this would affect whether extras work even if your requirements.txt is transitively closed.

@thundergolfer Semi-related to this issue is the dependency on the system installed version of python. Regardless of where these rules will be maintained, I put together a small rules project to address that bit of it. (https://github.com/digital-plumbers-union/rules_pyenv)

For this issue, my thought is that bazel controlled versions of python would aid the bits around pip, wheels and setuptools; ensuring those too are hermetic/ bazel controlled. Anyway, I wanted to update this post with that link while I was thinking about it. Maybe you guys will find it useful too! ¯_(ツ)_/¯