Lock down the requirement of fragment declaration.

All affected rules were annotated, and all known affected Skylark rules were
also annotated. The documentation was updated, so it looks like we're good
to go.

--
MOS_MIGRATED_REVID=101450297

1 files changed, 0 insertions, 5 deletions

diff --git a/src/main/java/com/google/devtools/build/lib/packages/RuleClass.java b/src/main/java/com/google/devtools/build/lib/packages/RuleClass.java
index 67cc9359fb..4bba5e8447 100644
--- a/src/main/java/com/google/devtools/build/lib/packages/RuleClass.java
+++ b/src/main/java/com/google/devtools/build/lib/packages/RuleClass.java
@@ -1254,11 +1254,6 @@ public final class RuleClass {
    * are declared, this allows access to all fragments for backwards compatibility.
    */
   public boolean isLegalConfigurationFragment(Class<?> configurationFragment) {
-    // For now, we allow all rules that don't declare allowed fragments to access any fragment.
-    // TODO(bazel-team): All built-in rules declare fragments, but Skylark rules don't.
-    if (requiredConfigurationFragments.isEmpty() && requiredConfigurationFragmentNames.isEmpty()) {
-      return true;
-    }
     return requiredConfigurationFragments.contains(configurationFragment)
         || hasLegalFragmentName(configurationFragment);
   }