Release 1.5.0. Branching b/w ROS N, and M or older

[130s]

Conversation about new release is started hidden at https://github.com/ros-drivers/openni2_camera/pull/101#issuecomment-758609532, so I'm moving it to a ticket.

• For Melodic the one registered as of today is indigo-devel. Looking at https://github.com/ros-drivers/openni2_camera/pull/98 the only diff needed b/w ROS M and N is manifest change, which is trivial. But honestly I don't forsee many changes to come in for this pkg so I'm fine to keep separate branches for now (don't touch what's been working principle) unless people think differently.
• Technically this PR is a new feature, let alone bugfix. ROS community is a bit more proactive in adding new features into already-released distro (compared to e.g. apt/Ubuntu). I suggest a "happy-medium": Release this into Noetic and Melodic, but not to Kinetic (which is about to EoL in a few months).
  • If there's convincing voices to support Kinetic release we can as well.
  • Hope making a feat. release into M is ok.

CoS

1. [x] Create a devel branch for ROS1 suggested in https://github.com/ros-drivers/openni2_camera/issues/103#issuecomment-758718607
2. [x] Fix CI.
3. [x] Update readme to clarify devel branching as suggested in https://github.com/ros-drivers/openni2_camera/issues/103#issuecomment-758718607
4. [x] Make releases, have PRs merged on rosdistro, for ROS Noetic, Melodic, Kinetic from the new devel branch.
5. [x] Remove noetic-devel branch (be sure to do this after PRs to rosdistro are merged).

[MatthijsBurgh]

ABI check succeeds for Kinetic, Melodic and Noetic. So based on that it could be ported back to Kinetic as well.

Based on Kinetic EOL, I agree with you to skip Kinetic.

[mikeferguson]

Feature releases into older distributions happen all the time - as long as they are API compatible. Some repositories actually enforce ABI compatibility, but they are the minority within the ROS1 ecosystem (mainly those that are low-level and shipping libraries others might actually build on).

I would suggest to rename the noetic-devel branch as "ros1" and use it to release into melodic+noetic. I'd also suggest updating the README for that branch to note that it supports melodic and noetic.

[130s]

Looks like I beat the discussion to it for Noetic release https://github.com/ros/rosdistro/pull/27961

Branching and adding a note for M and N sounds good.

[MatthijsBurgh]

@130s when do you plan to release for Melodic?

[130s]

I think it'd be better, less future burden if we can clean the branching before making a release into ROS1 M as Mike said in https://github.com/ros-drivers/openni2_camera/issues/103#issuecomment-758718607. I'd have to review https://github.com/ros-drivers/openni2_camera/pull/98 again whether a release can be made for both M and N from the same branch.

That said I pushed ros1 branch made off of noetic-devel branch. If anyone can review the branching, and send PRs to ros1 branch if necessary, that'll be great.

[MatthijsBurgh]

The only changes compared to 0.4.2 (last release of Kinetic and Melodic) are the changes from #101. These are already in the ros1 branch. I have updated the travis config. See #105. I don't think any other changes are needed. So it can be released into Melodic.

[130s]

Conditions of satisfaction in order I think of are posted on the top post.

[130s]

• Make releases, have PRs merged on rosdistro, for ROS Noetic, Melodic, Kinetic from the new devel branch.

• N https://github.com/ros/rosdistro/pull/28192
• M https://github.com/ros/rosdistro/pull/28193
• K https://github.com/ros/rosdistro/pull/28194

[130s]

Looks like all PRs https://github.com/ros-drivers/openni2_camera/issues/103#issuecomment-770935498 are merged.

Once synch happens for all distros, latest released installers will be made off of the new ros1 branch so that noetic-devel won't be in use, thus we can delete it at that time IMO.

[130s]

noetic-devel branch is deleted.