On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Jack O'Quin wrote: > On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Ken Conley wrote: > >> The plans are just that -- plans.  It is up to the members of each SIG >> to achieve as much of that plan as possible in time for the freeze >> dates of ROS Fuerte (remember, there's always Groovy Galapagos). > > Ken, > > Are these SIG's intended to persist across releases? > > My original impression was that they are just for Fuerte, but I can > see that some of them may need several releases to achieve their > goals. I hadn't really thought that far ahead, by my two cents is that the default is for SIGs to not persist and to basically have SIGs re-declare themselves in the next release. This would only be a mild semantic difference -- given that creating a SIG is as easy as copy-and-paste into a new wiki page, any SIG that wishes to do long-term effort is welcome to do so. My main reasoning for this is that SIGs are meant to bring together people doing similar work, but that work will shift over time so the SIG structure needs to respond to that. For example, some SIGs will likely be combined in fuerte, but in groovy there might be enough divergent interest to un-condense those efforts. - Ken > -- >  joq > _______________________________________________ > ros-users mailing list > ros-users@code.ros.org > https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users >