Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add ignition source packages import formula. Latest versions for launch2, gazebo3, rendering3, sensors3, sdformat9 (Focal) #102

Merged
merged 12 commits into from
Mar 29, 2021

Conversation

j-rivero
Copy link
Contributor

@j-rivero j-rivero commented Mar 1, 2021

Ignition Focal packages in the bootstrap repository lack of source packages for Focal.

Packages are split in two sets:

  • Some of the versions did not change in the stable packages.osrfoundation.org repository, import source packages for them in ignition_focal_source.yaml
  • Other versions were updated and the source package was lost after the update. I've rebuilt the same code and upload these old versions to the testing server in ignition_focal_from_testing.yaml

Update: one single file containing:

  • Missing source packages for the latest versions
  • Update to latest version together with source packages for old versions.

@j-rivero j-rivero changed the title Add ignition source packages import formula (Focal) Add ignition source packages import formula. Latest versions for launch2, gazebo3, rendering3, sensors3, sdformat9 (Focal) Mar 23, 2021
@j-rivero
Copy link
Contributor Author

@chapulina quick note that with this PR we start to change the behavior and latest Ignitions land in the ROS repository. I assume that we want this sync, will probably get many new users of these versions.

@chapulina
Copy link
Contributor

we start to change the behavior and latest Ignitions land in the ROS repository

I'm not sure I understand, will the process be automated now? What's the change in behaviour?

@j-rivero
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'm not sure I understand, will the process be automated now? What's the change in behaviour?

Sorry, the change would be trying to be more in sync between the ROS repo and the Ignition repo. It's not going to be fully automated but tools to make things easier are being merged.

@chapulina
Copy link
Contributor

Ah gotcha. Upgrading the Citadel versions of all libraries on packages.ros.org should be safe and good to do at any point. We just need to be sure to update them as a whole.

Mostly trying to do the same thing consistently and I think putting the
space there makes it a bit easier to read since it's a lot of
punctuation.
I'm not sure if these groups need to be explicit for precedence's sake
but it's a bit easier for me to read with the added grouping.
gazebo11 packages was missing and the libogre-2.1 / libogre-2.1-dev packages were
missing from the ogre-2.1 block.
Copy link
Contributor

@nuclearsandwich nuclearsandwich left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@j-rivero I'd be glad if you gave this the once-over after all the commits I added to it.

@@ -1,106 +1,93 @@
name: gazebo11_ubuntu_focal.yaml
name: ignition_focal_source
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Not sure if changing the name impacts on your workflow @nuclearsandwich . I'm trying to be accurate, if possible, if not, feel free to drop the suggestion.

Suggested change
name: ignition_focal_source
name: ignition_citadel_gazebo11_focal_source

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

While there's no hard requirement. The name should definitely match the filename. Good catch.

@j-rivero
Copy link
Contributor Author

@j-rivero I'd be glad if you gave this the once-over after all the commits I added to it.

Thanks for fighting making that format somehow readable, looks like an improvement to me. The meaningful commits helped to review. All ready, feel free to merge. I just left a minor suggestion about the name.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants