But Bazel is developed by Google itself right now. Presumably if you missed Google tooling you'd rather use Bazel, no?
I'm not suggesting Bazel is perfect: I think e.g. Starlark's insistence on being a separate language does more harm than good. (FWIW I also think the JVM objection is a little silly.) But I am saying preferring the Google tooling would ostensibly mean you like Bazel a lot already :)
I've read Bazel without the rest of Google tooling (giant monorepo of everything, distributed build farms, etc) the experience is nowhere near the same.
Starlark is _almost_, but not quite_ Python, and Python 2 at that. You could do everything Starlark does in actual Python and get stuff like static type checking for free.
I think the term DSL is overloaded here? Consider all the Lisp and Ruby stuff that's definitely DSL but doesn't need most of a language implementation.
I'm not suggesting Bazel is perfect: I think e.g. Starlark's insistence on being a separate language does more harm than good. (FWIW I also think the JVM objection is a little silly.) But I am saying preferring the Google tooling would ostensibly mean you like Bazel a lot already :)