<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Christian Rauch <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:Christian.Rauch@dfki.de" target="_blank">Christian.Rauch@dfki.de</a>></span> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
Am 08.07.2014 13:53, schrieb Sylvain Joyeux:<div class=""><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
I don't like this, as in most situations people *want* the GUI. The nogui<br>
case is a special case. all packages including the GUI is the common case.<br>
Note that gui/vizkit was already part of rock.toolchain before the<br>
migration.<br>
</blockquote></div>
For me the gui should be also not a part of the toolchain. The toolchain should contain tools for building and running a system. The gui is used to visualize and debugging.</blockquote><div>All (or close) of developers installations will most probably want the GUI. All control stations will want the GUI. The only </div>
<div><br></div><div>With rock.core as it is right now, we basically cover 90% of all the rock installations. That's the very goal of having a rock.core in the first place, as it is part of the rock core "experience" (I hate that word ...).</div>
<div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
But there should be one metapackage (rock.minimal?) that only contains the packages from the infrastructure that every installation really needs, for example orogen, rtt, base-types, roby, syskit. Without them you cannot build and run any rock installation. </blockquote>
<div>Why not ? You can run components without orocos.rb. Probably something that will happen more and more in embedded systems, where one will just start a deployment with the few relevant components inside, doing the "orchestration" from another machine. No roby, no syskit, no ruby for that matter. You could even pre-generate the components on a separate machine and only build them on the target machine (that would remove orogen). As soon as we start speaking about particular needs, I really don't see where the limit is.</div>
<div><br></div><div>The problem with this whole thread is that you are opening a can of worms. I want, with the rock.core metapackage, to cover 90% of the installations *and* make it easy for new users.</div><div><br></div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
By just using the minimal packageset I don't need to select all required packages manually and you are not forced to install optional packages.<br></blockquote><div> </div><div>FYI, the only way to get rid of an optional package is currently to exclude it from the build.</div>
<div> </div><div>Sylvain</div></div></div></div>