On 7/10/25 10:21, Piyush Raj wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> On 09/07/25 03:33, David Faust wrote:
>>> diff --git a/contrib/bpf-vmtest-tool/.gitignore
>>> b/contrib/bpf-vmtest-tool/.gitignore
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 00000000000..723dfe1d0f4
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/contrib/bpf-vmtest-tool/.gitignore
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
>>> +.gitignore_local
>>> +.python-version
>>> +# Byte-compiled / optimized / DLL files
>>> +__pycache__/
>>> +*.py[codz]
>>> +*$py.class
>>> +
>>> +# Unit test / coverage reports
>>> +.pytest_cache/
>>> +
>>> +
>>> +# Environments
>>> +.env
>>> +.envrc
>>> +.venv
>>> +env/
>>> +venv/
>>> +ENV/
>>> +env.bak/
>>> +venv.bak/
>>> +
>>> +# Ruff stuff:
>>> +.ruff_cache/
>>
>> Will the files be e.g. byte-compiled in typical use? At a glance I think
>> most (all?) of these will never be created in ordinary usage. If that's
>> the case we can probably not include this local .gitignore at all.
>>
>>
> In normal use, only __pycache__ would be generated, but I checked, and
> the project's root .gitignore already covers it at line 17. So we can
> drop this .gitignore
Great, thanks.
>
>
>>> +DEVELOPMENT
>>> +===========
>>> +
>>> +Development dependencies are specified in `pyproject.toml`, which can be
>>> used
>>> +with any suitable Python virtual environment manager.
>>> +
>>> +To run the test suite:
>>> +
>>> + python3 -m pytest
>>
>> Can the tests be run without a pyproject.toml, or is it required?
>> (I mean the tests of bpf-vmtest-tool itself)
> The current tests can be run with "python3 -m pytest
> --import-mode=importlib tests" without pyproject.toml. But some pytest
> options can only be specified in pyproject.toml file and don't have
> command-line alternatives.
>> As far as I understand it is typically for packages. But in this case
>> it seems, now that we don't have external deps, to come down to a local
>> development utility thing along the lines of .clang-format or so, which
>> we aren't checking in.
> Yes, pyproject.toml is used for packaging python projects, but it's also
> used by tools like pytest and ruff under their [tool.*] tables (see:
> https://packaging.python.org/en/latest/guides/writing-pyproject-toml/ )
> While it's not needed to run the script itself, most development tools
> depend on it, so I think it makes sense to include it in the source to
> help set up consistent development environments.
OK, thanks for clarifying.
I don't have a strong opinion either way. For C we do not maintain in-tree
configs for development environments, but they probably make more sense for
python. So I'll defer to you :)
(Note: I'm not sure whether there is already a rule about this for contrib/
one way or the other, if there is we should follow it. )
>
>>> +# https://git.sr.ht/~brianwitte/gcc-bpf-example/tree/master/item/Makefile
>>
>> Is this comment attached to anything in particular?
>>
>> I guess you followed here the same structure outlined in Brian Witte's
>> Makefile,
>> right? It would be good give a bit of context to the link, otherwise it just
>> seems out of place.
> Thanks. I'll add clarification that the current implementation uses
> Brian's Makefile as a reference.
>
> Best regards,
> Piyush
