@Severin: Currently the following ROS packages are in Debian and will likely be imported for Xenial: http://pastebin.com/aVk8Wy6q As you can see it is only a very small number of packages (~ROS base). OSRF will continue to ship its own Debian packages for a very simple reason: we need to be able to release patches which the Debian policy doesn't allow. If you look at the ROS base packages in Indigo and how they evolved over the life time it is obvious that we need this ability.


@Mike: I completely see your point. Imo the Python tools should be made available as soon as a new Ubuntu distro becomes available (basically before it is even alpha). But when I suggested this before is was decided not to be a priority. Maybe you can express this on the Kinetic release ticket (https://github.com/ros/rosdistro/issues/9945) so that it will be added to the procedure for the next Ubuntu distro.

Thank you,
- Dirk



On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 8:13 AM, Mike Purvis via ros-users <ros-users@lists.ros.org> wrote:
You can obviously build desktop-full on Wily from source— us Mac users are used to doing that all the time. Though it's a bummer that the independent bootstrapping packages (python-rosdep, python-rosinstall-generator, python-catkin-tools, etc) aren't actually available as debs for Wily, so you do have to get them from pip.

M.

On 4 February 2016 at 04:50, Séverin Lemaignan <ros-users@lists.ros.org> wrote:
Hi Tully,

What about the effort to mainline ROS in Debian? Things have been progressing nicely (debian unstable now has a 'ros-desktop-full' package [1] -- I'm not sure however how much of ROS is actually packaged), and I wondered if the OSRF is officially endorsing or going to endorse this endeavour.

--- btw, if I get this right, this may mean that in Ubuntu 16.04 (or possibly 16.10), users are likely going to face a choice between ros-kame-desktop-full (OSRF packages) and ros-desktop-full (Debian mainline packages)... some confusion in perspective!

Cheers,
Séverin

[1] https://packages.debian.org/sid/ros-desktop-full

On 04/02/16 04:22, Tully Foote via ros-users wrote:

You're right that there's a bit of a gap. This gap was discussed during the
decision to slow down our release cycle. Unfortunately, that's basically an
artifact of Ubuntu dropping their regular release support periods to only 9
months and our yearly release cycle. This leaves us with a gap since there
is no Ubuntu release except the LTS which spans the full year between our
releases.

There's been a few questions in the past about the effort to add a new
target platform. And the general answer is that it's approximately the same
effort as spinning up a new distro. All the maintainers must go through
their packages in dependency order and rerelease them after verifying them
against their updated dependencies. With the strong feedback from the
community to slow down the release process there's basically no way to
cover the gap.

And when you look at doing that we are about to spin up that process for
Kinetic Kame, which will support Wily and Xenial. Thus we would be asking
all the maintainers to do twice as much work. In the not too distant future
we do expect to have early test releases of Kinetic available for Wily. I
would rather ask people to put their effort into Kinetic and make our next
LTS even more solid. We've seen a lot of people sticking to Trusty-Indigo
and expect them to be jumping directly to Xenial-Kinetic.

Expect to hear more about Kinetic soon. We've been preparing for it in the
background [1] but will be kicking off officially shortly.

________________________________
[http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/images/email_footer.gif]<http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/worldclass>

This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on it. If you have received this email in error please let the sender know immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan emails and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied by an official order form.
_______________________________________________
ros-users mailing list
ros-users@lists.ros.org
http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users


_______________________________________________
ros-users mailing list
ros-users@lists.ros.org
http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users