Hi all developers,
I have a proposal to clean up the Orocos components library. There are too
many components in there which are not generic enough and are still there only
for historical reasons. I think this scares away people to use the OCL
themselves because it is not so obvious which components they can use.
So I propose to move out the following components to a PMA specific repository:
hardware/apci
hardware/demotool
hardware/krypton
hardware/kuka
hardware/laserdistance
hardware/lias
hardware/performer_mk2
hardware/staubli
hardware/xyPlatform
and to completely remove
viewer
which is unmaintained and can only be used with a very old version of kdl
If enough people agree i can move these to a PMA maintained repository. Which
should make it easier for Peter to release new versions of OCL
Ruben
Proposal to clean up OCL
On Oct 8, 2008, at 03:11 , Ruben Smits wrote:
> Hi all developers,
>
> I have a proposal to clean up the Orocos components library. There
> are too
> many components in there which are not generic enough and are still
> there only
> for historical reasons. I think this scares away people to use the OCL
> themselves because it is not so obvious which components they can use.
>
> So I propose to move out the following components to a PMA specific
> repository:
>
> hardware/apci
> hardware/demotool
> hardware/krypton
> hardware/kuka
No!
> hardware/laserdistance
> hardware/lias
> hardware/performer_mk2
> hardware/staubli
No!
> hardware/xyPlatform
I had to use sources in both Kuk and Staubli to understand much of
creating an OCL/RTT application. I would highly recommend _not_
removing these, they were my only source of reference for complete
systems. There have been a couple of brief mentions of application-
specific examples/tutorials in the past few months, in conversations
with both Peter and Herman. As far as I'm concerned, these two dir's
are the only current examples of that - without these, I would have
been lost and quite likely given up on Orocos.
BTW, what is a PMA repository?
S
Proposal to clean up OCL
On Wednesday 08 October 2008 13:42:11 S Roderick wrote:
> On Oct 8, 2008, at 03:11 , Ruben Smits wrote:
> > Hi all developers,
> >
> > I have a proposal to clean up the Orocos components library. There
> > are too
> > many components in there which are not generic enough and are still
> > there only
> > for historical reasons. I think this scares away people to use the OCL
> > themselves because it is not so obvious which components they can use.
> >
> > So I propose to move out the following components to a PMA specific
> > repository:
> >
> > hardware/apci
> > hardware/demotool
> > hardware/krypton
> > hardware/kuka
>
> No!
>
> > hardware/laserdistance
> > hardware/lias
> > hardware/performer_mk2
> > hardware/staubli
>
> No!
I agree with Stephen. We need at least to leave the 'best' robot examples in
the repository. Even if people don't have this kind of robot, it works like a
reference. Even more, according to 'OCL guidelines', these examples should
get a one-pager with the basic usage instructions and application layout.
I agree that we should remove bad/non working examples, but that's about it.
For example, we've been pointing people to the krypton example for reading
ethernet udp sockets...
Peter
Proposal to clean up OCL
On Wednesday 08 October 2008 13:42:11 S Roderick wrote:
> On Oct 8, 2008, at 03:11 , Ruben Smits wrote:
> > Hi all developers,
> >
> > I have a proposal to clean up the Orocos components library. There
> > are too
> > many components in there which are not generic enough and are still
> > there only
> > for historical reasons. I think this scares away people to use the OCL
> > themselves because it is not so obvious which components they can use.
> >
> > So I propose to move out the following components to a PMA specific
> > repository:
> >
> > hardware/apci
> > hardware/demotool
> > hardware/krypton
> > hardware/kuka
>
> No!
>
> > hardware/laserdistance
> > hardware/lias
> > hardware/performer_mk2
> > hardware/staubli
>
> No!
>
> > hardware/xyPlatform
>
> I had to use sources in both Kuk and Staubli to understand much of
> creating an OCL/RTT application. I would highly recommend _not_
> removing these, they were my only source of reference for complete
> systems. There have been a couple of brief mentions of application-
> specific examples/tutorials in the past few months, in conversations
> with both Peter and Herman. As far as I'm concerned, these two dir's
> are the only current examples of that - without these, I would have
> been lost and quite likely given up on Orocos.
The source would still be available as examples, but maybe it is better to
move them somewhere else, out of the much more generic OCL library. I've heard
people referring to OCL as a "garbage bin" with a lot of code they don't
want/like which results in not looking at the other interesting stuff inside
OCL, which is a pity.
> BTW, what is a PMA repository?
PMA is our division at the Mechanical Department of the KULeuven, I would
propose to create an svn-repository with all the code that is specific for us
at PMA.
Ruben