CLion plugin is incompatible to bazel flag incompatible_disable_target_provider_fields

[martis42]

Description of the bug:

A Bazel project using incompatible_disable_target_provider_fields to make sure it is not by accident using deprecated behavior is not compatible to the CLion Bazel plugin.

Desired solution:
Changing the implementation to use the forward path pattern and then to use incompatible_disable_target_provider_fields in the CI to make sure the issue does not reappear until Bazel flips this flag in a future release.

What's the simplest, easiest way to reproduce this bug? Please provide a minimal example if possible.

1. Setup a Bazel project with CLion
2. Create a .bazelrc file in the project and add --incompatible_disable_target_provider_fields
3. Start a project sync

Exemplary error:

ERROR: <path_to_build_file>/BUILD:3:10: in @intellij_aspect//:intellij_info_bundled.bzl%intellij_info_aspect aspect on py_binary rule //src/apply_fixes:main: 
Traceback (most recent call last):
	File "<path_into_cache>/e663c61e10a8ed8d3fb71670c233b37b/external/intellij_aspect/intellij_info_bundled.bzl", line 67, column 37, in _aspect_impl
		return intellij_info_aspect_impl(target, ctx, semantics)
	File "<path_into_cache>/e663c61e10a8ed8d3fb71670c233b37b/external/intellij_aspect/intellij_info_impl.bzl", line 1017, column 28, in intellij_info_aspect_impl
		direct_deps = make_deps(direct_dep_targets, COMPILE_TIME)
	File "<path_into_cache>/e663c61e10a8ed8d3fb71670c233b37b/external/intellij_aspect/intellij_info_impl.bzl", line 263, column 21, in make_deps
		return [make_dep(dep, dependency_type) for dep in deps]
	File "<path_into_cache>/e663c61e10a8ed8d3fb71670c233b37b/external/intellij_aspect/intellij_info_impl.bzl", line 258, column 21, in make_dep
		target = dep.intellij_info.target_key,
Error: Accessing providers via the field syntax on structs is deprecated and will be removed soon. It may be temporarily re-enabled by setting --incompatible_disable_target_provider_fields=false. See https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel/issues/9014 for details.

Which Intellij IDE are you using? Please provide the specific version.

CLion 2023.1.1 Build #CL-231.8109.2222

What programming languages and tools are you using? Please provide specific versions.

Python 3.8, rules_python 0.8.0, bazel_skylib 1.4.1

What Bazel plugin version are you using?

2023.03.10.0.1-api-version-231

Have you found anything relevant by searching the web?

There are several automatically created issues which are closed without any comment:

• Flag --incompatible_disable_target_provider_fields will break Android Studio Plugin in Bazel 1.2.1 #1507
• Flag --incompatible_disable_target_provider_fields will break IntelliJ Plugin in Bazel 1.2.1 #1508
• Flag --incompatible_disable_target_provider_fields will break CLion Plugin in Bazel 1.2.1 #1509
• Flag --incompatible_disable_target_provider_fields will break IntelliJ Plugin Aspect in Bazel 1.2.1 #1510

Linked to the tracking issue for this incompatibility flag is this issue bazel-contrib/SIG-rules-authors#36. An existing bug bounty for resolving this is in my opinion a sign that the Bazel team indeed intends to flip this flag.

Any other information, logs, or outputs that you want to share?

To my knowledge flipping this flag (with an adapted implementation of course) is backwards compatible up until at least Bazel 4.0.0. I don't know what the status for even older versions is.

[tpasternak]

@mai93 same as here, do you know if Google team plans to work on it?

[mai93]

I just noticed that this required moving the minimum supported version of Bazel to be 4.0.0. I'm not sure how many users are still on older versions, we can discuss this in the SIG meeting

[martis42]

@mai93 did you receive feedback in the SIC meeting? With the release of Bazel 7, Bazel 4 is now deprecated. I don't know your user base, but to me requiring at least Bazel 4.0.0 from users seems like a reasonable thing.

[mai93]

I think we already have Bazel 4.0.0 as the oldest supported Bazel version for a while now 8ec7779

[martis42]

So this issue is unblocked then by now?
If and when somebody has time to fix this is of course a different question.

[mai93]

I think we will keep it at P3 for now, meaning that we do not have a plan to fix it but we can review PRs that address this.

[github-actions]

Thank you for contributing to the IntelliJ repository! This issue has been marked as stale since it has not had any activity in the last 6 months. It will be closed in the next 14 days unless any other activity occurs. If you think this issue is still relevant and should stay open, please post any comment here and the issue will no longer be marked as stale.

[martis42]

The issue is still relevant