On 28-4-2016 6:07, Tully Foote via ros-release wrote:
> Hi Vincent,
[..]
> The one time it might be appropriate to tag something in the package.xml is
> if the package has binary code included inside which is not compiled but
> supplied as a blob. However as we strongly discourage those cases and have
> very few of them, I think that continuing to use the blacklists for them is
> appropriate.
[..]
just a data point for the include-binary-blobs use-case: distributing
binary blobs is something that is very popular with mfgs of (3D) cameras
/ positioning systems / laser scanners. Their SDKs are typically of the
form "docs + header + lib". Building ROS wrappers around that is
possible (obviously), but to be able to release it, it's almost
unavoidable to not do something like including those blobs in the package.
Perhaps we could come up with some other way of doing that, but for
those cases it might be nice to be able to do something Vincent is
proposing.
Another example are commercial SDKs for fieldbuses fi: no way to get
anything compilable, and it really won't be found in a Debian/Ubuntu
repository.
Gijs
_______________________________________________
ros-release mailing list
ros-release@lists.ros.org
http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-release
(text/plain)