We’re going through the process of applying REP 2004 to the SROS2 utilities. We’re shooting for quality level 2. Part of that is tracing the quality levels of our dependencies. I know we’re all bootstrapping REP 2004 here, so it’s not surprising that neither of our two main dependencies currently declare a quality level:
- ros2cli: @dirk-thomas you’re currently listed as the maintainer. Can you outline your intentions and timeline (if any) for a quality declaration in ros2cli?
- rclpy: @wjwwood same question to you for rclpy.
rclpy was explicitly left out of our initial plans to apply REP-2004 to core packages due to time and resources. I don’t have plans (or time) to bring rclpy up to that level any time soon. That may change, but based on our experience with the other packages it is a fair amount of work and I don’t personally have time to do it.
I think this is hitting a more general issue of under-maintenance on rclpy. We may need to recruit more people to help or try to allocate more resources within open robotics to do things like this. I’ll bring it up and see if there’s anyone interested in pushing this forward.
Fair enough, thanks @wjwood. That’s a pretty pivotal dependency for us, I’m afraid. We can definitely improve aspects of the SROS2 utilities moving toward quality level 2, but I doubt we’ll actually be able to claim level 2 without our key deps also doing so.
Sorry, no intentions or timeline from me on ros2cli either.
[My name is also only listed as the maintainer since I originally implemented the packages. These packages are kind of group-maintained by all the Open Robotics employees working on ROS 2. We will hopefully be able to update these metadata in the near future and more accurately reflect authorship and individual maintainers.]