Closed cor3ntin closed 6 years ago
research works and new targets should rather be added in-tree
A product that uses Aseba is not necessarily part of Aseba. Needless strong coupling should be avoided
@davidjsherman I agree that a product or third party is not necessary part of aseba. Butr is there a sense to distribute all the lib and header file in the packet we provide?
@mbonani no reason at all. To make it easy to reuse Aseba in a product it would be best to provide an SDK package. On Debian and on Windows (MinGW or Chocolatey) this would be a binary development package, on macOS this would would be a framework. It is not difficult.
Note that this is different from https://github.com/aseba-community/aseba/issues/797#issuecomment-360212930 and https://github.com/aseba-community/aseba/issues/793#issuecomment-360063972 because in the cases I am discussing we are compiling (for webassembly).
No issue for a binary development package?
@davidjsherman I applied the PR in Mobsya's fork as this was mostly relevant to Mobsya.
Aseba is more a set of tools than a framework. We do not make ABI or API stability guarantees except for some very specific classes.
Therefore we should not encourage people to use aseba as libraries.
Modification, research works and new targets should rather be added in-tree.