From ros-release-bounces@lists.ros.org Wed Jul 27 19:38:50 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ros-lurker@osuosl.org Delivered-To: ros-lurker@osuosl.org Received: from whitealder.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [140.211.166.138]) by ash.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B20F21C1208 for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2016 19:38:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by whitealder.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB509873D4 for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2016 19:38:50 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.523 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.523 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from whitealder.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4Qm8ixOgKyRO; Wed, 27 Jul 2016 19:38:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ash.osuosl.org (ash.osuosl.org [140.211.166.34]) by whitealder.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1FA586AAB; Wed, 27 Jul 2016 19:38:48 +0000 (UTC) X-Original-To: ros-release@lists.ros.org Delivered-To: ros-release@osuosl.org Received: from hemlock.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [140.211.166.133]) by ash.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FC3F1C1208 for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2016 19:38:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hemlock.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 995FB86F8F for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2016 19:38:47 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from hemlock.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IFw5bih8PdOZ for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2016 19:38:47 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mx-out-04b.sjc1.discourse.org (mx-out-04b.sjc1.discourse.org [64.71.168.241]) by hemlock.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 10ADA86F7A for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2016 19:38:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:aa:8::29e:122:3550]) by mx-out-04b.sjc1.discourse.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBDAC228F7 for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2016 19:38:46 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=discoursemail.com; s=sjc1; t=1469648326; bh=IRuw0Wb7B2eYLgVmwa8a0r1sOUJjQeSn3nUGKm/EHCw=; h=Date:From:Reply-To:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject: List-Unsubscribe:List-ID:List-Archive; b=b5lG5ebhQGK9t64m0UjALtABqFdpwCzlhhreoP1fP8UfadiRiQcdM0FHtcfS6igTk jqLY9OvRPLcEnvCGaaLkrxaQJwhOLumdW6zK9TelAo5XTeaOz3k6crubB/p50muipn 9WHyTGcLjsuAyjqpj4btoQ1x5FymLzUnnWZj82cKHhNXBP4pwZq/L2XkY74sYHiqKW w0CHzD9CQGwTe0WVTyb9SlQi4QW/rjQCq0UFre5JoaWEaDnXUSPqtXcQwntbZYzAKe 2/m7KaCDoBCngvL9PvRnFizbwvXw9O3/1c5VNHopP5trnvKAbVyASkLuuxkkCgQG1w 7hbo0m2vyKORw== Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2016 19:38:46 +0000 To: ros-release@lists.ros.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: list Subject: [ros-release] [Discourse.ros.org] [Release/Kinetic] FCL 0.5 packages for MoveIt in Kinetic X-BeenThere: ros-release@lists.ros.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 List-Id: The ROS release mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: tfoote via ros-release Reply-To: "Discourse.ros.org" , tfoote , The ROS release mailing list Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0887483471317199005==" Errors-To: ros-release-bounces@lists.ros.org Sender: "ros-release" --===============0887483471317199005== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_57990dc6b796f_10b33fa68ba63a801417cd"; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ----==_mimepart_57990dc6b796f_10b33fa68ba63a801417cd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit @jrivero Thanks for thinking this through. The side by side libraries is great and definitely make sense to me. For the headers, it's generally accepted that you can only install one. So making a conflicting package makes sense. And I think that making the `libfcl-0.5-dev` makes sense so that we can depend on the correct version. Otherwise you might get the default version if you just resolve the rosdep rule. --- [Visit Topic](http://discourse.ros.org/t/fcl-0-5-packages-for-moveit-in-kinetic/364/2) or reply to this email to respond. To unsubscribe from these emails, [click here](http://discourse.ros.org/email/unsubscribe/8bde988dde3f8bb416ecefe15fc9b8c16aa05cb2439761c93a8b823b3034ba2d). ----==_mimepart_57990dc6b796f_10b33fa68ba63a801417cd Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
tfoote
July 27

@jrivero Thanks for thinking this through.

The side by side libraries is great and definitely make sense to me.

For the headers, it's generally accepted that you can only install one. So making a conflicting package makes sense. And I think that making the libfcl-0.5-dev makes sense so that we can depend on the correct version. Otherwise you might get the default version if you just resolve the rosdep rule.


Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.

To unsubscribe from these emails, click here.

----==_mimepart_57990dc6b796f_10b33fa68ba63a801417cd-- --===============0887483471317199005== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ ros-release mailing list ros-release@lists.ros.org http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-release --===============0887483471317199005==--