feature/issue-345-bazel-build-go

[njlr]

This PR adds a Bazel build for the tool.
The test script still needs to be migrated to Bazel in a future PR.

This is an initial step towards #345

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @njlr, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request is an initial step towards integrating Bazel as the primary build system for the container-structure-test tool, addressing issue #345. The changes primarily focus on setting up the foundational Bazel infrastructure, defining build rules for the existing Go codebase, and managing Go-specific dependencies through Bazel. This lays the groundwork for future migrations, such as the test script, to fully leverage Bazel's capabilities for reproducible and efficient builds.

Highlights

• Bazel Build System Integration: This PR introduces Bazel as the build system for the container-structure-test tool. This includes adding the .bazelversion file, modifying core Bazel configuration files (BUILD.bazel, MODULE.bazel), and integrating necessary Bazel dependencies like rules_go and gazelle.
• Go Module Definitions for Bazel: Numerous BUILD.bazel files have been added across various Go packages (e.g., cmd/, internal/pkgutil/, pkg/, testutil/). These files define go_library and go_binary rules, effectively modularizing the Go codebase for Bazel's build graph and enabling fine-grained dependency management.
• Dependency Management Updates: The MODULE.bazel file has been updated to manage external dependencies, including version bumps for existing dependencies and the addition of new ones crucial for Go support, such as rules_go and gazelle. Explicit use_repo calls for Go dependencies ensure proper resolution within the Bazel ecosystem.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This PR adds Bazel build support for the Go tool, which is a great step towards modernizing the build system. The changes are mostly adding BUILD.bazel files generated by gazelle and updating MODULE.bazel with dependencies. My review focuses on improving the maintainability and consistency of these new Bazel files. I've suggested tightening visibility for internal command packages and fixing a naming inconsistency in one of the library targets. Overall, this is a solid contribution.