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

Move messages and services into separate package or repo #20

Closed
bit-pirate opened this issue Oct 11, 2013 · 5 comments
Closed

Move messages and services into separate package or repo #20

bit-pirate opened this issue Oct 11, 2013 · 5 comments
Milestone

Comments

@bit-pirate
Copy link
Contributor

in order minimise dependencies, e.g. for the app manager.

@wjwwood
Copy link
Member

wjwwood commented Oct 11, 2013

I can do this, but which dependencies are you concerned about?

@wjwwood
Copy link
Member

wjwwood commented Oct 14, 2013

Are we sure this is necessary, is there a compelling case for splitting these up? I would prefer to not make new packages unless there is a good reason. Normally I would agree that splitting up message generation would make sense, but in this case the capabilities package only add roslaunch and rospy to the dependencies. Do you have a case in mind for why this should be done?

@bit-pirate
Copy link
Contributor Author

I can do this, but which dependencies are you concerned about?

Well, basically I'm trying to keep the dependency of the app manager on the capability server/capabilities low. Preferable would be no dependency at all. I'm already taking care in the implementation, that the app manager runs fine even without a capability server being there. The capabilities package looks very light-weight and as you said, brings in very few dependencies. So, I'm not sure, if this is really an issue.

Looking further, I don't see many nodes ending up depending on the capabilities package (nor a capablities_msgs package). The only nodes doing so would probably be similar in functionality to the app manager. Can you think of other use cases?

@wjwwood
Copy link
Member

wjwwood commented Oct 15, 2013

Well, I am looking at bringing in bondpy too, now, but the app server will have to depend on the capabilities python API anyways, or copy the code where I use bondpy to create a bond. Either way it looks like to implement this reference counting correctly the app server will have to depend on bondpy (and probably already depends on rospy and roslaunch).

So, like I said I am happy to do this if/when you decide we need it.

The only other system that will use the capabilities that I can think of would be:

  • rqt_capabilities
  • any future capabilities CLI tools
  • something like the app server, as you said

@wjwwood
Copy link
Member

wjwwood commented Oct 15, 2013

I'm gonna close this for now, if in the future you think this is required please just comment here and I'll reopen it.

@wjwwood wjwwood closed this as completed Oct 15, 2013
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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants