[Ros-release] ABI compatibility

Jack O'Quin jack.oquin at gmail.com
Fri Jan 4 23:48:07 UTC 2013

On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 3:00 PM, Tully Foote <tfoote at willowgarage.com> wrote:

> My best estimate was that rolling over the version numbers to even values
> would cost us a full week of work for the core team and would require every
> single maintainer to respond quickly to the request to rerelease.  And
> availability of all maintainers any specific week is not likely.  Because
> of this large overhead I didn't ask everyone to comply with that policy.
>  You'll note I've updated the Version Policy wiki page to reflect that too.
> I think what this points out is that we need to make sure we develop a way
> to know what versions of packages are available in the debian repository.
>  And we should make the Changelogs much more visible.  There was a
> discussion long ago about moving the Changelogs from the wiki back into the
> source. I think it's time to revive that discussion.  Especially now that
> we have tools like bloom which could inject that information into the
> debian packages now.
> Also we should update REP 9 to not reference the even odd scheme, but be
> more explicit about when and where things should be compatible.
> And the last thing we should do is find a way to integrate some of the ABI
> checking tools into the prereleases to help maintainers know when things
> slip through the cracks.

+1 to all of that

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ros.org/pipermail/ros-release/attachments/20130104/aa639877/attachment-0009.html>

More information about the Ros-release mailing list