Closed jbohren closed 10 years ago
Same comments than for utilrb ... This is ROS-specific and going too far. This is not a cmake package, unlike what ROS forces you to make us believe. ROS-specific development should be limited to ROS-specific branches.
Same comments than for utilrb ... This is ROS-specific and going too far.
There is nothing ROS-specific in this PR. I don't understand how this is "going too far". Same comments for https://github.com/orocos-toolchain/utilrb/pull/8#issuecomment-58019202, how is this "ros-specific"?
This is not a cmake package, unlike what ROS forces you to make us believe.
Then why does it have a CMakeLists.txt
file? This PR is simply fixing a file that's already there.
This is a discussion that already happened on the ML. The addition of CMake stuff to both utilrb and orogen has been done for ROS. As long as it was one file, well, fair enough. This is adding more (now adding FindRuby, what's next ?) and we agreed with Peter that the build-system-specific development should from now on be done on branches.
@psoetens: care to check that we are indeed in agreement there ?
This is a discussion that already happened on the ML. The addition of CMake stuff to both utilrb and orogen has been done for ROS. As long as it was one file, well, fair enough. This is adding more (now adding FindRuby, what's next ?) and we agreed with Peter that the build-system-specific development should from now on be done on branches.
I'm not trying to get into a political fight, here. This is your package, if you don't want to support building on Ubuntu 12.04 via CMake, that's your prerogative. That being said, if you don't want to support building this package with CMake, then you should just remove the CMakeLists.txt
and the package.xml
file.
@psoetens No need to mediate this, I'm closing the PR.
This also fixes #2