[ros-users] Draft REP rosinstall setup-file element

[Ken Conley]

In general I'm a +1 on this, though at some point we will need to
overhaul the syntax as the overloading of the 'other' element and now
the inclusion of a 'setup-file' element has made the semantics
muddled.  For future reference/record, the 'other' element should
probably be done away with in favor of more specific semantics, like
'setup-file'.

The 'setup-file' itself could be extended to handled other shells more
explicitly.  In the current implementation, rosinstall's own setup
file does a lot of inference to source rosbash, which is undesireable
as this can lead to different results from Fuerte's
etc/catkin/profile.d/ bash-specific hooks.

 - Ken

On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 12:19 PM, Thibault Kruse <kruset at in.tum.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> with Fuerte approaching, there are several migrations to perform.
> As one such migration the rosinstall specification needs to change a bit
> to adapt to fuerte.
>
> Find attached a REP drafted by Tully Foote and me to make rosinstall work
> with Fuerte (and previous distros as well, of course).
>
> The reference implementation for it is the latest rosinstall rosinstall
> 0.5.30 released on pypi, which should now work with the pre-release
> version or Fuerte.
>
> Hopefully the change in the REP should remain invisible to users, and thus
> affect nobody in their work, but it would still be nice for a few people
> to review the draft.
>
> cheers,
>  Thibault
> _______________________________________________
> ros-users mailing list
> ros-users at code.ros.org
> https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users
>