On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 2:49 AM, Tully Foote <
tfoote@willowgarage.com> wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> In reviewing the state of ROS one of the things that is commonly sought in
> the community is better visibility into the status of packages. Whether
> packages are stable released software designed to be built on top of, or if
> the software is a one time release designed for a single experiment is
> sometimes very hard to tell. Also as people consider deploying ROS outside
> of research experiments reliability becomes much more important.
>
> To be able to make this happen we'd like to review/rewrite the ROS QA
> process.[1] And also while doing this we'd like to setup some verifiable
> tests to pass to achieve levels of certification, which can then be made
> visible on the wiki and/or in indexers to allow people to be able to have
> confidence in software that is downloaded.
>
> I'd like to kick off this process shortly after the groovy freeze, with a
> goal of having a working draft of the process and certification requirements
> by the end of October. The process will likely include a couple workshops,
> virtual or in person depending on the distribution of participants.
>
> To address this issue, I'd like to put out a call for participation in this
> working group. If you'd like to participate please contact me.
>
> Tully
>
> [1] http://www.ros.org/wiki/QAProcess
+1
--
joq
(text/plain)