On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 1:15 AM, Daniel Stonier wrote: > > > > On 12 November 2013 14:43, Dirk Thomas wrote: > >> On 11.11.2013 19:07, Daniel Stonier wrote: >> >>> >>> On 12 November 2013 06:41, Dirk Thomas >> dthomas@osrfoundation.org>> wrote: >>> >>> The wiki page was simply pretty outdated. >>> I have updated the ROS/Roadmap wiki page with current information: >>> http://wiki.ros.org/ROS/__Roadmap >>> >>> >>> Please feel free to discuss any further information which would be >>> useful on that page. >>> >> >> > Ok, perhaps some better wording is needed. > > >> I don't understand what that sentence is supposed to mean: >> "Hydro and Indigo will be staggered across Quantal, Raring and Saucy" >> Can you please clarify, Daniel? >> > > "Hydro and Indigo will be staggered across Quantal, Raring and Saucy" - > just a reflection of the graph above illustrating hydro/quantal, > hydro/raring, indigo/saucy. > > >> Regarding the "planning your development" section: >> if we do release Indigo as a kind of LTS version of ROS I would strongly >> disagree to first-time release any disruptive changes into that version and >> than aim for stabilizing them later... >> > > Note: I didn't intend with the statement on the wiki page to infer a first > time release on Indigo/Trusty. First time release would be on Indigo/Saucy > as a beta release. > > I thought I had heard Tully talking similar to what I outlined there. It > certainly is the way we are planning to move over the next year or so. If > it's not a general consensus, then certainly lets remove it. To clarify, we > need to look at targeting some fairly major release points with disruptive > changes. These disruptive changes have to go in somewhere, so for us, the > best approach would seem to be: > > - Develop on sources > - Beta release debs on Indigo/Saucy - this is a short term release, so > edge users only who are great for feedback. > - Officially release debs on Indigo/LTS Trusty - we've acommodated > many bugfixes hopefully and at this point we'd point our software on our > more official platforms. This though, is where most new users would see the > software. > - Avoid any further disruptive changes on J-Turtle/LTS Trusty - gives > the software and users time to enjoy and stabilise. > > Catkin went through a fairly similar process - it was beta released in > fuerte (which would be like an early groovy with the longer timespans now), > officially released in groovy on precise, and then hydro saw it really > settle in. Having groovy/hydro on precise, gave a fairly constant > environment to see that through. > > Of course, this isn't a must do, but is this a recommendation that folks > agree with and think would be useful? > Yes. Disruptive changes are always problematic. But, we need to spend more effort planning for smoother transitions. With releases coming farther apart, I expect them all to create noticeable disruption. To deal with that, I'd like the build farm to start generating Indigo packages soon. We can release the plethora of Python 3 fixes there, leaving Hydro stable. The long beta cycle will give actively supported packages an opportunity to deal with the changes. +1 to updating REP-0003 for Indigo. -- joq