[Fedora Robotics] What is qualified as "Packages related to Robotics"?!

[Hedayat Vatankhah]

/*Tim Niemueller <tim at niemueller.de>*/ wrote on 11/09/2010 7:03:51 PM +0350:
> On 08.11.2010 18:17, Rich Mattes wrote:
>
>> Perhaps we could make fedoraproject.org/wiki/Robotics into a landing page
>> showing off the technologies available in Fedora, with screenshots of
>> Player, Stage, Fawkes, RoboCup, etc. in action.  We could probably organize
>> it into Frameworks (player, fawkes rccsserver), Simulators (stage,
>> gazebo[eventually] rcsssimulator3d),  Development Environments (Arduino),
>> and Libraries (Gearbox, URG, OpenCV, etc.).  We could also provide links to
>> each package in pkgdb, etc.  fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Robotics would be
>> changed to contain the organizational stuff that's at wiki/Robotics, and
>> we'd provide a link to it from the main Robotics page.
> I like this idea. This gives a better visibility and attracts people.
> Once they are in our cobweb we can fan out with some links to more info.
>
>> We could also try to get a cool looking Fedora Robotics banner made like the
>> one in [1] (maybe talk to the design team?) and provide links to learning
>> resources for each package/framework/etc.
>>
>> I think the ultimate goal is to have a really nice Spins page like [2], but
>> for now I don't see why we can't make a nice presence on the wiki.
> I like that idea. I suck at such things, so someone else needs to take
> care of this. I see my effort more in packaging, preparing the demo, and
> generating a LiveCD.
> On a related note: for all the software we might be interested in I
> think we are more targetting a LiveDVD, rather than a LiveCD, but let's
> see where we end up.
>
>> As far as packaging proposals (i.e. Julius), I think we kind of have that in
>> place now in the "Interesting Pacakges Proposed for Packaging" section.
>>    Perhaps we could consolidate all of those sections into just "Wishlist,"
>> "In Progress," "Complete," and "Won't Package" sections.  It might be more
>> straightforward that way.
> Agreed. We should also now focus on what we have and make a nice demo
> out of it, and only secondary pull in new stuff until that is done imho.
> That doesn't mean "don't add new packages", of course. I just would like
> to focus our efforts on a small set of packages we connect to a nice
> demo and we can get (mostly) done until feature freeze, and then we can
> add all the useful robotics packages to the spin, especially to support
> as much hardware out-of-the-box as possible. We should not forget that
> documentation of how to use all that stuff will also be a crucial part.
>
> Hedayat: I have seen that you have added ROS to the wishlist. I have
> worked with it for some time now and visited Willow Garage and talked to
> some of the folks over there. Atm it is not even close to a shape where
> it could be packaged in a way acceptable for Fedora guidelines (the
> build and ROS-internal package system is just not up to it, yet). They
> are working on improvements, but it'll take some time. I'll also keep
> watching this. I have ported the Fawkes behavior engine to ROS, so
> ideally one can develop on that level independent of the underlying
> framework (to a certain degree). So if we write a Fawkes demo now, we
> might be able to reuse it on ROS with minimal modifications when the
> time comes.
Thank you very much for the information. :)

Hedayat

> Regards,
> 	Tim
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/robotics/attachments/20101110/ff9adb58/attachment.html