[ros-users] Software Status Reporting and Custom Builds

Jack O'Quin jack.oquin at gmail.com
Wed Sep 25 15:32:02 UTC 2013

On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 10:56 AM, Dejan Pangercic <dejan.pangercic at gmail.com
> wrote:

> Adolfo,
> >> > From a user perspective, I'm mostly interested in these qualities:
> >> > - Good and stable API
> >
> >
> > API stability can be tracked though proper versioning [1].

> Given the developer knows how to use that correctly. Otherwise I agree.

Unfortunately, many developers either do not know, or choose to abuse the
numbering conventions.

A recent example is PCL 1.7, which broke source compatibility with
virtually every ROS package using it. I have no complaint about removing
the ROS messages from PCL. That needed to be done.

But, the result should have been labelled 2.0, and there should have been a
tick-tock migration path for it. They ignored all that: easier for the PCL
developers, a major pain in the butt for everyone using it with ROS.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ros.org/pipermail/ros-users/attachments/20130925/3a006bc1/attachment.html>

More information about the ros-users mailing list