I agree, the libdc1394 solutions seem more minimal and supportable. --kk
On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 6:53 PM, Jack O'Quin <
jack.oquin@gmail.com> wrote:
> Trevor Jay <tjay@cs.brown.edu> wrote:
>>> On your last point, I understand your reluctance to add *yet another*
>>> dependency to the camera_stack and probe is very likely to generic to
>>> be considered a part of a camera stack proper. Still, it is very
>>> flexible and can be very useful for building imaging toolchains with
>>> ROS. This should be even more true once the nodelet interface has
>>> solidified.
>
> Blaise Gassend <blaise@willowgarage.com> wrote:
>> For me, the question would be how widespread gstreamer is. If it is part
>> of all supported distributions, then having a system dependency on it
>> isn't a problem for me. Even if gstreamer is not available on a system,
>> that will only cause problems when compiling the package that needs
>> gstreamer, so only people that need that particular package will have a
>> problem.
>
> My primary concern is that gstreamer would introduce another image
> stream framework within the ROS image pipeline. That seems
> architecturally undesirable. In my mind, what we want is more
> analogous to the dc1394src gstreamer plugin Trevor mentioned.
>
> I could be wrong about that and can probably be convinced otherwise.
> But, that is my current thinking. We already have two good ROS drivers
> based on libdc1394. I am more inclined to pursue those options.
>
> Comments and feedback are (always) welcome...
> --
> joq
> _______________________________________________
> ros-users mailing list
> ros-users@code.ros.org
> https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users
>
(text/plain)