feat: add skylib-gazelle compatible target for //android/rules.bzl

[vpanta]

This adds a bzl_library target for //android/rules.bzl which should match the expected target name when using bazelbuild/bazel-skylib's gazelle plugin. Without this, users of the plugin who also depend on these rules will need to manually adjust their configuration.

[ahumesky]

The //android package is for compatibility with the (very) obsolete 0.1.1 release which put the rules under //android. The new releases use //rules. Can gazelle use the new package? We'd like to get rid of //android at some point.

[ahumesky]

(it's not clear to me from a cursory search how gazelle is picking up //android https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Abazel-contrib%2Fbazel-gazelle%20android&type=code)

[vpanta]

The //android package is for compatibility with the (very) obsolete 0.1.1 release which put the rules under //android. The new releases use //rules. Can gazelle use the new package? We'd like to get rid of //android at some point.

Hrm, k, then yeah that'll be trickier. The code generating this is actually a gazelle extension here, but AFAICT it's a fairly "dumb" tool: it just assumes every .bzl has a matching, single-source bzl_library target. That's why it generates/expects //android:rules for android/rules.bzl. It'd be nice to make it smarter and figure out the correct bzl_target based on the BUILD files, but doing so would take notably more time then adding one BUILD target in the short term.

Since using //rules:rules.bzl is the more appropriate way, then another possible upstream answer would to do the same as this but in rules/BUILD instead?

And if this is a no-go, no worries, I can just override it locally while I see if there's a better fix to the gazelle plugin.

And just some context: I'm making a new ruleset based on bazel-contrib/rules-template, and it uses that gazelle plugin. The ruleset will depend on rules_android.

[ahumesky]

Thanks for the details. Seems then that whether gazelle generates / expects a //android:rules or //rules:rules bzl_library depends on whether the codebase loads from //android:rules.bzl or //rules:rules.bzl.

So presumably then codesbases that are currently loading from //android:rules.bzl that migrate to //rules:rules would also stop using //android:rules bzl_library when gazelle regenerates the BUILD files

And presumably then this would also fail for //rules:rules.bzl because there is not a rules bzl_library target in https://github.com/bazelbuild/rules_android/blob/f0de7b98621a0bae1b4bf1adde1378c4e83c0da1/rules/BUILD ? So maybe both need to be added.

[vpanta]

Yep, exactly, it generates it based on the load statement, but it assumes the target is the same name as the file.

If y'all are ready for folks to migrate to //rules:rules.bzl and //android:rules.bzl is effectively a deprecated path, then I'd say only make the change for that directory. I think it's much more likely that new users will start with the gazelle-plugin, in which case they should be using the new path. Older repos picking up the plugin should probably update anyways, and can adjust the load path then.

I do wish there were a way we could warn folks using the old load though.

For now I've changed this to doing //rules:rules only. But if you'd like me to add both, I'm happy with that.