[ros-users] [Discourse.ros.org] [General] Proposed changes to the ROS releases

[Dirk Thomas]

[quote="carlosjoserg, post:8, topic:4736"]

Why most of ROS development dont use a unique branch, say `master` or `unstable` or `default` , where you mostly accept PRs for new features and bug fixes, and then tag releases from there with any of the suggested rolling schedules proposed above, (or even branch from there, if you like a release-per-branch style to cherry-pick compatible bug fixes and features into previous releases)? This way, you guarantee all new features and bug fixes will be available in every new release since they are in a single development branch.

[/quote]



Depending on the requirements for your packages your suggestion has the problem of containing "contrary" goals:

* have new features available in every

* aim for stability since every code change has the potential to introduce regressions



The balance between these two is the same in any software development. If you think about Linux distributions it is the same there: released distros don't get new features but only important bug fixes. The same rational applies to `ros_comm`: stability is very important and "weighted higher" than the availability of the latest feature.



For more "leaf" packages which are not that heavily relied on the weighting would be different. And I think that is what we see also in the branching style of ROS package. Packages further on the "lower" level (in the dependency hierarchy) and heavily used often use distro specific branches and more "higher" level packages often use a single master / development branch spanning multiple ROS distros.











---

[Visit Topic](https://discourse.ros.org/t/proposed-changes-to-the-ros-releases/4736/9) or reply to this email to respond.