cocotb coherence

[toddstrader]

Is there an expectation for HEAD-to-HEAD correctness between cocotb and cocotb-bus? Is coherence expected to be best effort? Will the packages be released in tandem so at least releases are known to work together? Also, I'm not sure if this is possible with GitHub CI, but should this repo know when it is broken wrt cocotb's HEAD?

Also also, what's the prognosis for this repo? I see it hasn't had a commit in over a year. Dare I ask, is cocotb-bus dead?

I recently posted #62 when fork was removed from cocotb. And now I'm seeing that _AssignmentResult has been removed with is breaking bus.py. I haven't dug further since the last round of pruning in cocotb, so I'm not sure what else is busted. I can keep fixing things up, but just want to make sure I'm headed in a meaningful direction.

@ktbarrett thoughts?

[ktbarrett]

We need a maintainer willing to work on this repo. And I don't think that cocotb-bus and cocotb should be able to be installed together right now, the setup.py in this repo lists <2.0.

EDIT: Ah, 2.0.dev0 is less than 2.0.

[jahagirdar]

@ktbarrett @toddstrader ,
I too am interested in the future of this repo. To make cocotb VIP's reusable, it is better if they follow a similar pattern, By providing the basic building blocks this repo helps in that direction.
Looking at the VIP's I use, almost all of them have spun their own bus system(AXI,SPI) or require complicated invocations to do basic stuff(AHB, Wishbone)
If we can have a discussion on the future direction for this repo, I volunteer to spend some time on this.

[gbowers4]

I agree @jahagirdar - I think providing a basic set of tools to implement VIPs is a good direction, happy to put in some work to get this functionality alongside the cocotb project.

[jahagirdar]

@eric-wieser @cmarqu @imphil ,
Is it possible to enable github discussions on this repo. This will facilitate a structured discussion on the future development.

[cmarqu]

Good idea, I just enabled them.