)]}'
{
  "commit": "f552441945fd45e9cb258ebf73c493c90db5f72d",
  "tree": "8e59e9892eeefc36f4dc8af2271be3f3d4707550",
  "parents": [
    "110064d84a415b69acbfc2f02ebee7707947e37a"
  ],
  "author": {
    "name": "Googler",
    "email": "ilist@google.com",
    "time": "Mon Oct 07 02:50:07 2024 -0700"
  },
  "committer": {
    "name": "rules_java Copybara",
    "email": "noreply@google.com",
    "time": "Mon Oct 07 02:50:43 2024 -0700"
  },
  "message": "Implement ProguardSpecInfo in Starlark\n\nThis addresses the problem of needing --experimental_google_legacy_api for ProguardSpecProvider used by java_lite_proto_library.\n\nAlthough the latest Bazel 7 minor release exposes the provider without the need for a flag, the provider is impossible to obtain in prior versions without setting the flag.\n\nReplace the provider with a Starlark version, irregardless of Bazel version. This never fails and if there\u0027s a Bazel user that needs it, they are probably already advanced enough to set it up together with everything else.\n\nThe risk of always using a starlark version is that some combinations don’t work - like native Android rules with Starlark proto rules. Or Starlark proto rules with native Android rules.\n\nPiperOrigin-RevId: 683101513\nChange-Id: I7523438e74a2bd1913e8e05fad2f3af18db7eebd\n",
  "tree_diff": [
    {
      "type": "modify",
      "old_id": "a57a0ed753561ae3089f85371a6c0a48d585e865",
      "old_mode": 33188,
      "old_path": "java/common/proguard_spec_info.bzl",
      "new_id": "b2a591a2226fba3baed8f778488a2731c884e825",
      "new_mode": 33188,
      "new_path": "java/common/proguard_spec_info.bzl"
    }
  ]
}