From ros-users-bounces@code.ros.org  Thu Jun  2 23:40:11 2011
Return-Path: <ros-users-bounces@code.ros.org>
X-Original-To: www-data@code.ros.org
Delivered-To: www-data@code.ros.org
Received: from pub5.willowgarage.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pub5.willowgarage.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B12D25E5C1;
	Thu,  2 Jun 2011 23:40:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: ros-users@code.ros.org
Delivered-To: ros-users@code.ros.org
Received: from cavuit01.kulnet.kuleuven.be (rhcavuit01.kulnet.kuleuven.be
	[134.58.240.129])
	by pub5.willowgarage.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1DB425C005;
	Thu,  2 Jun 2011 23:40:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-KULeuven-Envelope-From: ruben.smits@mech.kuleuven.be
X-Spam-Status: not spam, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=-45.168, required 5, 
	autolearn=disabled, KUL_SMTPS -50.00, RCVD_IN_PBL 3.56,
	RDNS_NONE 1.27)
X-KULeuven-Scanned: Found to be clean
X-KULeuven-ID: 95029138301.A1664
X-KULeuven-Information: Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
Received: from smtps02.kuleuven.be (smtpshost02.kulnet.kuleuven.be
	[134.58.240.75])
	by cavuit01.kulnet.kuleuven.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95029138301;
	Fri,  3 Jun 2011 08:40:07 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from rsmits-laptop.localnet (unknown [91.176.2.173])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by smtps02.kuleuven.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B1C2F3862;
	Fri,  3 Jun 2011 08:40:07 +0200 (CEST)
X-Kuleuven: This mail passed the K.U.Leuven mailcluster
From: Ruben Smits <ruben.smits@mech.kuleuven.be>
To: orocos-dev@lists.mech.kuleuven.be,
 "peter@thesourceworks.com" <peter@thesourceworks.com>,
 ros-developers@code.ros.org
Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2011 08:40:06 +0200
Organization: KULeuven
User-Agent: KMail/4.6 beta4 (Linux/2.6.38-9-generic; KDE/4.6.3; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimQGa+Ct8wN9nN9Uo1_+=tWCNCcKw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTimQGa+Ct8wN9nN9Uo1_+=tWCNCcKw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <20110603064007.8B1C2F3862@smtps02.kuleuven.be>
Cc: "orocos-users@lists.mech.kuleuven.be"
	<orocos-users@lists.mech.kuleuven.be>,
 ros-users@code.ros.org
Subject: Re: [ros-users] [Orocos-Dev] Proposal to restructure
	orocos_toolchain_ros
X-BeenThere: ros-users@code.ros.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Ruben Smits <ruben.smits@mech.kuleuven.be>,
 User discussions <ros-users@code.ros.org>
List-Id: User discussions <ros-users.code.ros.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users>,
	<mailto:ros-users-request@code.ros.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: </lurker/list/ros-users.html>
List-Post: <mailto:ros-users@code.ros.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ros-users-request@code.ros.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users>,
	<mailto:ros-users-request@code.ros.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ros-users-bounces@code.ros.org
Errors-To: ros-users-bounces@code.ros.org

Hi Peter,

I'm also forwarding to ros-mailinglists, to make sure we don't miss any 
feedback from that community ;)

On Friday 03 June 2011 00:16:17 Peter Soetens wrote:
> I'd like to propose to restructure the orocos_toolchain_ros such that
> new&existing users can more easily find their way. It's mainly about
> renaming packages:

This is indeed a issue that's waiting for a proposal.

> 1. rtt_ros_integration -> rename to 'rtt_rosnode'
> -> an import("rtt_rosnode") makes your process a ros node

Looks ok to me

> 2. rtt_ros_integration_xyz_msgs -> rename to 'rtt_xyz_msgs'
> -> shorter notation, also makes it easier for users to update their
> manifest file, just prefix with 'rtt_'

Or make rtt a suffix? xyz_msgs_rtt?? And maybe even put them in a seperate stack 
(We only provide typekites for the common_msgs stack)
-> common_msgs_rtt?

> 3. rtt_ros_param -> rename to 'rtt_rosparam'
> -> consistent naming scheme, service is also named 'rosparam' and not
> 'ros_param'

Look sane to me.

> 4. rtt_ros_service -> ?
> -> a bit confusing about what it does, I wonder if the code shouldn't
> belong in rtt_rosnode instead, since it only provides the ros.topic()
> operations, which make only sense when running in a rosnode... I would
> also propose that this global 'ros' service is available from the
> moment rtt_rosnode is imported. Today you need an extra
> 'require("ros")' in scripting and something similar in lua.

Maybe we could put the functionality of rospack, rosparam and the 
rtt_ros_service, all in the rtt_rosnode package?

> What do the current users/devs think ?

If we do the renaming, we will brake a lot of existing applications, since we 
are still in the experimental versioning scheme 0.x, I don't have a problem 
with that but we have to communicate this name changing very clearly to our 
users.

> Peter

-- Ruben
_______________________________________________
ros-users mailing list
ros-users@code.ros.org
https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users

