Yes, there are benefits to having everything in one repository.
@esteve pointed out to me the difficulties ROS 2 has had with the complexity of CI pipelines when a PR needs specific branches or commits from more than one repository. Were hoping that having a relatively small number of repositories compared with ROS 2 will reduce that difficulty for us. We could have broken down things much further to smaller segments of functionality to satisfy goals like separating safety-critical and non-safety-critical core completely, but we dont want too many repositories that will be too tightly integrated.
Installation or checking out a project from multiple repositories is also difficult. Here, the `vcs` tool is a life saver. I wouldnt attempt multiple repositories without it.
Interdependencies between repositories can become problematic. Again, I think the small number of repositories will help. In addition to that, the proposed split is along natural breaks in the processing pipeline for core packages but not further than that, and the others are things that can naturally exist separately from core functionality. We will be relying on black box interfaces as much as is practical.
---
[Visit Topic](
https://discourse.ros.org/t/splitting-the-autoware-ai-repository-and-changing-the-organisation/8139/3) or reply to this email to respond.
If you do not want to receive messages from ros-users please use the unsubscribe link below. If you use the one above, you will stop all of ros-users from receiving updates.
______________________________________________________________________________
ros-users mailing list
ros-users@lists.ros.org
http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users
Unsubscribe: <
http://lists.ros.org/mailman//options/ros-users>
(text/plain)