Cut a new release?

[sea-bass]

With the ROS 2 test porting (and according fixes) and action support we recently added, we should probably cut a new release in this repo as well.

This should minimally be 1.4.0, but given we're doing a v2 in roslibjs, maybe this could be 2.0.0 as well?

[lukeopteran]

@sea-bass a release would be great, we would like to use the working image compression, without having to clone to a specific commit.

The latest ros2 branch produces a type error in the ros_loader (Running under Galactic!). It works fine at commit 501a926

Thanks

[danmartzla]

Hi all,

Is the new release planned to be launched soon? I need to use actions through "rosbridge" but the latest release available on the debian repositories don't support them yet.

Thank you.

[sea-bass]

You can always build this repository from source and use the actions support today.

[sea-bass]

For a bit of background, this project's ROS 2 action support was driven by needing them in roslibjs.

The working plan is that we need some help writing integration tests for ROS 2 in roslibjs (RobotWebTools/roslibjs#746), and once that is clear, we were going to release a version 2 of both these repos.

[bjsowa]

@sea-bass Any plan on making a new release? The last one was exactly 1 year ago and is broken on Rolling and Jazzy due to #926.

inb4 I know I can build it from source, just prefer using binary releases whenever I can.

[sea-bass]

As with my last comment, the plan was to make some ROS 2 tests for roslibjs and then cutting a release for both that and rosbridge_suite.

But the way things are shaking out, seems nobody is willing to contribute those tests, so I'd be open to maybe just releasing rosbridge_suite at this point.

@EzraBrooks @MatthijsBurgh what do you guys think?

[EzraBrooks]

I don't think blocking rosbridge_suite's release on roslibjs makes sense, since other roslib implementations use it. I'm still not interested in releasing roslibjs until it has ROS 2 integration tests, but I don't think that should gate this repo.

[sea-bass]

@bjsowa Now that you're officially approved for releases, would you like to help cut a 2.0.0 release of this repo? I can prepare the changelogs and update version numbers, but I don't have access to actually bloom the repos.

The tricky thing is that the humble branch actually has diverged from ros2 (which includes iron+later), so I'm not sure what the versioning should be.

This is because #932 was needed for Jazzy, but did not work on Humble, so we did this: #934

I guess what makes most sense to me is:

• Backport everything that is possible to humble branch, tag that as 2.0.0
  • All future updates to humble will necessarily be patch releases, so 2.0.1, ...
  • Release this to Humble
• Tag the ros2 branch as 2.1.0
  • Release this to Iron, Jazzy, and Rolling

[bjsowa]

@sea-bass Sure, I can run bloom if you prepare the branches.

• Backport everything that is possible to humble branch, tag that as 2.0.0

  • All future updates to humble will necessarily be patch releases, so 2.0.1, ...
  • Release this to Humble

• Tag the ros2 branch as 2.1.0

  • Release this to Iron, Jazzy, and Rolling

This is what I typically do in such case, except I increase the major number so ros2 branch would get 3.0.0 version. This is not ideal though if the major version has some special semantic meaning to you.

[sea-bass]

Yeah, I might stick with 2.1.0 for the ros2 version since the changes will truly be minor.

[sea-bass]

OK all the backports needed for humble are here.

Once these are in, I'll generate a 2.0.0 changelog from humble, then we'll bring that up to ros2 and amend it to 2.1.0 with the few updates.

@MatthijsBurgh -- it seems like @bjsowa was only added to the web_video_tools repo, but not to this one as a possible reviewer. Could you look into that as well? Thanks!

[MatthijsBurgh]

@sea-bass Done. I think we should reorder all the organization teams soon. As I think it is a pretty big mess.

[sea-bass]

@sea-bass Done. I think we should reorder all the organization teams soon. As I think it is a pretty big mess.

It doesn't look too bad -- the file is here: https://github.com/ros2-gbp/ros2-gbp-github-org/blob/latest/robotwebtools.tf

[sea-bass]

#966 and #967 have been merged, and we'll make the necessary steps so the releases are added to the next syncs of Humble, Iron, Jazzy, and Rolling.

[MatthijsBurgh]

@sea-bass I meant the teams in the github organization, https://github.com/orgs/RobotWebTools/teams,.