Re: ITP: qucs -- an integrated circuit simulator with a graphical user interface

[Andreas Tille <tille@debian.org>]

[Moved from debian-devel to debian-edu list - IMHO it belongs way more
 there.  The history of this thread started here
  http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2013/07/msg00108.html
]

Hi José,

On Fri, Jul 05, 2013 at 11:12:41AM +0200, José Luis Redrejo Rodríguez wrote:
> 2013/7/5 Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu>
> > Thanks for bringing Debian Science up - otherwise I would have done
> > this.  Luis, Debian Science repositories (SVN or Git as you prefer) are
> > writable for any DD so you can commit straight to it.  The package is
> > also mentioned in Debian Science task electronics - so it perfectly fits
> > here.  I'd strongly recommend using Debian Science Vcs for packaging
> > because your work will show up on the Blends sentinel even before it is
> > uploaded.
> >
> >
> 
> Andreas, I don't see it clear:
> - For me qucs is education related more than science, so, I'd consider it
> in debian-edu more than in debian-science

Well, there are a lot of packages that fit perfectly in both and it
makes no sense to "fight" for one or the other.  Regarding the Blends
tasks it is very simple:  We mention the package in both and are done.

If you need to decide for a VCS to maintain your packaging I would also
not mind at all if you would do it in Debian Edu area - the only problem
is that Debian Edu has not (yet - I know this is work in progress)
established a kulture to maintain educational relevant packages inside a
common VCS.  In other Blends this as proven to be a *very* helpful
thing.  I just would like you to step back from a two-men-qucs packaging
team - we just have a working infrastructure in Debian Science that can
perfectly hold the qucs packaging and if Debian Edu might have this at
one day and you feel better in working there it's perfectly fine to
move.

> - I've been qucs maintainer for 8 years, and filled the needed itp to have
> it again in the archive after a qt4 version looks to be working.

That's great.

> - I don't like at all  Adms in qucs, its compilation in most Debian
> platforms is not very clear, and it looks more like a patch than a program
>
> - If Adms is a problem I will check how qucs works without Adms, because
> there's not a working circuits simulator in Debian for secondary and
> vocational teaching (oregano is totally buggy and geda is a joke for
> teenagers). If verilog part must be removed to compile and work correctly
> in Debian I think that can be assumed, as there are some compilers and
> simulators to use verilog in Debian  which are suitable for adults or
> university students.
 
I have no idea what Adms might be - so I can not comment here.

> But...
> I'd be glad to consider maintaining qucs with someone who is collaborating
> with upstream and would be happy to see this mess finishing and having
> again qucs in the Debian archive. As I've previously said, it's a needed
> tool as there are no graphical working electronics simulators in Debian. My
> students are using now https://www.circuitlab.com/ because of it. If
> Bastien has tested the compilation of adms in non intel architectures and
> it's not a problem we could go ahead, but I need more info to avoid the
> stalling of qucs in sid because of Adms problems with the builders. As I've
> said before, qucs should work without Adms and verilog is not a must for me
> when I think in the secondary and vocational teaching world.

As far as I see it is a good idea to discuss qucs issues on a mailing list
where knowledged people are reading.  I have no idea whether this might be
rather debian-edu or debian-science list.

Kind regards

      Andreas.

-- 
http://fam-tille.de