Layered diagrams #121
Layered diagrams #121
Conversation
| | Workspace | ROS2 ament workspace | ROS1 catkin workspace | ROS1 rosbuild workspace | | ||
| | Build tool | ament_tools | catkin_tools, catkin_make, cmi | rosbuild | | ||
| | Build system | ament_cmake, cmake, python | catkin, cmake | rosbuild | | ||
| | Package | ROS2 package, cmake/python project | ROS1 package, cmake project | ros1 rosbuild package | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The visual presentation is certainly helpful. But I think the information is presented too early in the document. Especially since at that point the terms of build tools and build systems haven't been clearly defined. And because the table mixes the terminology and doesn't distinguish between those which imo confused the reader.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Feel free to move to another section or suggest one
|
|
||
| (Note catkin_make cannot build pure cmake projects) | ||
|
|
||
| ### Phase 1 goal: unify build systems (not rosbuild) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If someone would like to implement an extension to the unified build tool to support rosbuild that would be absolutely feasible. There this shouldn't be excluded like this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
would "rosbuild not shown" be ok for you?
| 4. Create DAG of packages for building the workspace | ||
| 5. Invoke buildsystem plugin command for each package in build order | ||
|
|
||
| ### Phase 2 goal: unify workspaces |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think this article to outline such a phase. The current draft briefly mentions the intrinsic complexity of mixing workspaces like that which are beyond the build tools control: see https://github.com/ros2/design/pull/115/files#diff-361c5cb5b98ec5e7f690f2dbce2cd7fdR186 Also even if all build tools and build systems do the technical part of mixing them well there are other aspects like name spacing of ROS 1 and ROS 2 packages, their rosdep keys, etc. Therefore I think this is exceeding the scope of this article.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In the comments of the main PR @wjwwood seems to argue for such a goal #115 (comment), that's why I added it.
|
I added some information from this in 7ae99af Please comment / open another PR for additional changes. |
In the spirit of a picture saying more than a thousand words, this table art might help.
Quick link to rendered result:
https://github.com/tkruse/design/blob/build_tool2/articles/101_build_tool.md
Because there is confusion about homogenous workspaces as a goal, I split up goal into 2 phases. Labelling could of course be different, such as humble/ambitious, or primary/secondary, ... I am dispassionate about that labelling.