Then ... my next question would be: Why isn't there more resistance w.r.t. switching to master ?
I mean, when you say "oh I had a bug on syskit on next", did you report it as a functionality bug on next ? Did you insist that it should be fixed *on next* ? instead of switching to master ? For new functionality, how much of it is "oh but I need X, it is so shiny" instead of "without X, I really cannot do it !". I mean, when I worked on the Orion I *wanted* some features from master, but quickly realized that I did not *need* them. I had what was strictly needed to get the Joints type (meaning typelib/master but orogen/next) As for the release schedule / frequency, I can only do +1. Releases are too far apart. My big problem here is that master has become the de-facto version of Rock that everyone uses, which really hinders possibility to do some actual development. Sylvain On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Matthias Goldhoorn < [email protected]> wrote: > On 04.06.2014 15:43, Sylvain Joyeux wrote: > > Is that everyone seem to think that they need master. The majority should > be using stable or next. > > Now, I *know* that there are reasons (there are always reasons) why one > might think that master is required. However, the main question for me is: > > How can we make people feel confident that they can use next ? > > Or > > How can we ensure that 'next' can be used except for a few packages > that would go on master ? > > The best way to start answering these questions is to answer another one: > > Why are you on master ? > > > Because i using syskit and the next version is even more unstable than > master. I had several times that the depandancy between roby/syskit and > other 'core' packages is hard. So i cannot stay a long time on next and > only with syskit/roby on master. > Indeed i'm not sure if i can currently use syskit/roby on next and > everything else on master. > > So generally speaking, incompatibilities between > syskit/roby/utilmm/utilrb/typelib/orogen/ base/types/(std) > > > The Second point, is that the release cycle to next is to long for new > features, i i (as rock-dev) add new features to rock. I take ofter months > before it goes into next. > Therefore i have (due to the same reasons above) switch to master, also > for other members of my project. I would prefer a shorter release time > between master/stable/next... > > > > Best, > Matthias > > > > > Sylvain > > > _______________________________________________ > Rock-dev mailing > [email protected]http://www.dfki.de/mailman/cgi-bin/listinfo/rock-dev > > > > -- > -- > Matthias Goldhoorn > Unterwasserrobotik > > Standort Bremen: > DFKI GmbH > Robotics Innovation Center > Robert-Hooke-Straße 5 > 28359 Bremen, Germany > > Phone: +49 (0)421 218-64100 > Fax: +49 (0)421 218-64150 > E-Mail: [email protected] > > Weitere Informationen: http://www.dfki.de/robotik > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > Deutsches Forschungszentrum fuer Kuenstliche Intelligenz GmbH > Firmensitz: Trippstadter Straße 122, D-67663 Kaiserslautern > Geschaeftsfuehrung: Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. mult. Wolfgang Wahlster > (Vorsitzender) Dr. Walter Olthoff > Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Prof. Dr. h.c. Hans A. Aukes > Amtsgericht Kaiserslautern, HRB 2313 > Sitz der Gesellschaft: Kaiserslautern (HRB 2313) > USt-Id.Nr.: DE 148646973 > Steuernummer: 19/673/0060/3 > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > >
_______________________________________________ Rock-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.dfki.de/mailman/cgi-bin/listinfo/rock-dev
