On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 8:50 PM, Eric Perko <email@example.com> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 9:10 PM, Jack O'Quin <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> Are there other drivers we should repackage in this way? Let's try to
>> compile a (fairly) complete list.
> Here's my list (I envision the current stack would continue on in some sort
> of "meta-package" manner as discussed above):
> Laser Drivers:
> Hokuyo_node goes to a unary stack
> Sick_driver stack that contains the sicktoolbox and sicktoolbox_wrapper
That makes sense to me. We need to contact the maintainers to see if
they want to do it.
> IMU Drivers:
> We've only got the Microstrain driver, but I think keeping around an
> imu_drivers meta-package would be consistent with the laser and camera
> Is there any intention of splitting the joystick_drivers into unary stacks?
They can if they want. Thoughts, Melonee?
My feeling is that driver stacks which seldom change probably do not
need to repackage. The reason camera_drivers should is because there
are always a lot of bug fixes and new features in every release, and
it becomes awkward to synchronize releases for all those drivers at
once. Since users normally only depend on drivers for the specific
devices they use, that synchronization is artificial and unnecessary.
We should be able to release each camera driver when it is ready,
without affecting the others.
This message was posted to the following mailing lists: