[ros-users] Enterprise Version of ROS

Edwards, Shaun M. sedwards at swri.org
Mon Apr 16 15:20:41 UTC 2012


Based on our customers, which I admit is probably a very narrow viewpoint, there would be no need for backwards compatibility.  Our customers aren't interested in the latest and greatest.  What's more important is that the version that they are using is robust and reliable.  In practice this might result in porting critical bug fixes back to "certified" versions for those customers that need it, but I would hope these would be few and far between.

I wouldn't want to limit ROS development by imposing backwards compatibility requirements.  As ROS and associated libraries become more mature we could then impose backwards compatibility requirements.

I think what you point out is certifying versions of ROS will require significant amounts of testing development effort.  The hope would be that the testing software component would not have to be reworked every time we decide to created a certified version of ROS, thereby imposing some sort of backwards compatibility requirement.  There is certainly a balancing act that we as a community need to maintain so that we can have certified versions of ROS with commercial acceptance as well as freedom to change and develop ROS as needed to meet research objectives.

Shaun Edwards
Senior Research Engineer
Manufacturing System Department

Southwest Research Institute

From: ros-users-bounces at code.ros.org [mailto:ros-users-bounces at code.ros.org] On Behalf Of Kartik Babu
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2012 9:53 AM
To: User discussions
Subject: Re: [ros-users] Enterprise Version of ROS

Aside from maximizing the MTBF to meet industrial standards, the pace at which API either change or deprecated is also another topic to address.

There is also the issue of dependence on other libraries for important functionality, (OpenCV, PCL etc.). OpenCV seems fairly stable, but PCL like ROS is still 'settling in'.

How would we reconcile the need for new 'certified versions' to be backwards compatible with older certified releases, and the need to  incorporate new, cutting edge packages so that ROS can grow as a whole?


2012/4/16 Adolfo Rodríguez Tsouroukdissian <adolfo.rodriguez at pal-robotics.com<mailto:adolfo.rodriguez at pal-robotics.com>>

On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 4:40 AM, Jonathan Bohren <jonathan.bohren at gmail.com<mailto:jonathan.bohren at gmail.com>> wrote:
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 9:31 PM, Edwards, Shaun M. <sedwards at swri.org<mailto:sedwards at swri.org>> wrote:
I agree that hardware drivers are a good place to start.  However, I think the sooner we can certify ROS core (communications, node handling, etc..), the better.

I know this is the first question I get asked by someone unfamiliar with ROS when I mention it. This is an especially important focus here at Hopkins where so many research systems are being developed for applications with high-cost-of-failure like robotic surgery, deep sea exploration, and on-orbit telerobotics.

I see two very valid and mostly orthogonal use cases so far.

1. Ensuring that certain core ROS functionalities comply with some (3rd-party certified) criteria, so that people that deal with high-cost-of-failure or safety-critical systems can trust what they are using.

2. Ensuring that a certain piece of hardware/software is ROS-compatible, so that people that venture into using them can expect compliance with specified ROS interfaces (no surprises attached).

I see great value in both, but to clarify, my initial answer to this thread was oriented mostly towards 1.



Jonathan Bohren
PhD Student
Dynamical Systems and Control Laboratory
Laboratory for Computational Sensing and Robotics
The Johns Hopkins University

(707) 520-4736<tel:%28707%29%20520-4736>
jbo at jhu.edu<mailto:jbo at jhu.edu>

ros-users mailing list
ros-users at code.ros.org<mailto:ros-users at code.ros.org>

Adolfo Rodríguez Tsouroukdissian
Robotics engineer
adolfo.rodriguez at pal-robotics.com<mailto:adolfo.rodriguez at pal-robotics.com>

c/ Pujades 77-79, 4º4ª
08005 Barcelona, Spain.
Tel. +34.93.414.53.47<tel:%2B34.93.414.53.47>

AVISO DE CONFIDENCIALIDAD: Este mensaje y sus documentos adjuntos, pueden contener información privilegiada y/o confidencial que está dirigida exclusivamente a su destinatario. Si usted recibe este mensaje y no es el destinatario indicado, o el empleado encargado de su entrega a dicha persona, por favor, notifíquelo inmediatamente y remita el mensaje original a la dirección de correo electrónico indicada. Cualquier copia, uso o distribución no autorizados de esta comunicación queda estrictamente prohibida.

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and the accompanying document(s) may contain confidential information which is privileged and intended only for the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.  If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this e-mail and/or accompanying document(s) is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender at the above e-mail address.

ros-users mailing list
ros-users at code.ros.org<mailto:ros-users at code.ros.org>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ros.org/pipermail/ros-users/attachments/20120416/bd23c897/attachment-0004.html>

More information about the ros-users mailing list