[ros-users] [Discourse.ros.org] [general] REP3 proposal for Lunar Loggerhead

Rich Mattes ros.discourse at gmail.com
Tue Jan 24 14:57:42 UTC 2017

I have a couple of questions about the mention of Fedora in the REP:

First, what does "recommended support" for Fedora and Debian mean?  That the build-from-source process should generally work?  Or is there thought of adding binary releases for those distributions?

Second, unless something in Fedora land changes, Fedora 25 will go EOL ~13 months after its release date[1], or around December 2017.  Fedora 26, which will be released in the June 2017 timeframe[2], will be EOL around July 2018.  Does it make sense to call out specific distribution versions when they won't all be supported over the same timeframe as the ROS release?  Or, in cases where a distributions future plans are unknown that far out, does it make more sense to just make a blanket statement that the earliest and/or latest supported version of that distribution should be supported by ROS?

That said, Fedora is already incompatible with the "Exact or Series" requirements.  We've already got pcl-1.8 in fedora 24 and higher[3], and Qt 5.6 or higher in fedora 24 and higher[4].  On the other hand, we won't introduce gazebo 8 or probably opencv-3.2 until fedora 26, as large breaking changes in released fedora versions violate the stable release updates policy[5].  So do they really need to be exact, or are they only enumerating the requirements as dictated by the environments on the "Required Support for" platforms?

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Release_Life_Cycle#Maintenance_Schedule
[2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/26/Schedule
[3] https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/pcl
[4] https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/qt5
[5] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy#Stable_Releases

[Visit Topic](https://discourse.ros.org/t/rep3-proposal-for-lunar-loggerhead/1179/5) or reply to this email to respond.

More information about the ros-users mailing list