+0  This is a bit too draft to vote on for my tastes (I do see the call for
help, but I'm not sure how one does that with a REP).

Sorry to be nitpicky, but this is a spec, so here are my nitpicks:

 * Master File:
  * Why type 'ros-distributions'? Took awhile for me to spot
'ros-distribution' vs. 'ros-distributions'.  If it's a 'master file', why
not 'master'?
  * ... though 'master' is already defined in ROS, so why not pick another
name altogether?

 * Why not just 'build', 'distribution' instead of 'ros-build',
'ros-distribution'. Also, the ros-build and ros-test create confused
meanings with rosbuild and rostest.

 * Distribution File:
   * "list a couple of repositories" -> "listing repositories"
   * Having different value types for 'targets' in the distribution file
vs. build file is confusing.  I'm also trying to understand if 'targets'
for distributions is really necessary

 * 'Build File', 'Test File': while I appreciate the simplicity of the
naming, it creates headaches for communication: "it's in the build file...
I wrote a test file."  Although less simple, 'Distro Build' and 'Distro
Test' would be clearer.

 * Distribution Cache File: this doesn't seem to belong in the spec or the
format as it is undefined.
 * File Formats:
   * Why not put these in the Specifications section so the definition and
formats can be read together (much easier to understand that way)
   * "We want to use the YAML file format for these files" -> this is a
spec, it should declarative.  "The format is YAML."
   * While I appreciate formatting rules, it encumbers the spec by placing
limiting machine write-ability.


On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 9:36 PM, Paul Mathieu <pmathieu@willowgarage.com>wrote:

> Hi everybody,
>
> Here is a tentative REP-137 draft, which gives a rationale and a
> specification for rosdistro files, with the intent of formalizing what was
> not.
> These files are used by the release process as well as the buildfarm. The
> mid-term goal is to ease binary package builds, especially by custom
> buildfarms.
>
> You can find this draft REP here:
>
> https://github.com/po1/rep/blob/rep137/rep-0137.rst
>
> And the pull request is here:
>
> https://github.com/ros-infrastructure/rep/pull/27
>
> Please note that the REP still lacks some tiny bits here and there. Any
> good will is more than welcome to contribute.
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Paul Mathieu
>
> _______________________________________________
> ros-users mailing list
> ros-users@code.ros.org
> https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users
>
>