[Pkg-electronics-devel] Should cocotb & pyuvm be under Electronics or Python team ?

[Agathe Porte]

Hi Ahmed,

2023-07-23 02:04 CEST, أحمد المحمودي:
>   I am currently working on packages for cocotb [1] & pyuvm [2], both
>   are Python packages, that are used for verification (simulation) of
>   VHDL/*Verilog models, ie. their scope is electronics. Do I am
>   wondering whether to package them under Electeonics team or Python
>   team.

For choosing the team, it depends on which expertise you want the team
which holds the package to have. For pure Python software, I would say
that the expertise of the Debian Python Team is more useful.

>   Also, I've set the Section source control field to 'electronics', yet
>   lintian complained that since the binary package names are
>   python3-{cocotb/pyuvm}, then the section should be 'python'. Should I
>   ignore/override that ? Or should I modifybthe Section field to
>   'python' ?

>From my quick look at cocotb’s documentation [3], it seems to ship at
least one binary in $PATH named `cocotb-config`. Here is how it could be
packaged:

- `cocotb` srcpkg in `electronics` section;
- `python3-cocotb` binpkg in `python` section, containing the library;
- `cocotb` binpkg in `electronics` section, Depends on `python3-cocotb`
  and contains the executables.

Same advice would apply for pyuvm, which I did not look at.

> [1] ITP: https://bugs.debian.org/1041288
> [2] ITP: https://bugs.debian.org/1041285
[3] https://docs.cocotb.org/en/stable/quickstart.html