Add Ubuntu Jammy as a Tier-3 platform. #413
Conversation
|
This will fix ros2/ros2_documentation#4913 . |
|
I'll go through the PMC process to get this voted on and then get it merged. |
|
CI is failing here, I believe because the runner is still using Ubuntu 20.04. See #418 which should fix this. |
This is already called out properly as a Tier-3 supported platform on https://docs.ros.org, but we forgot to update the table here to do the same. Signed-off-by: Chris Lalancette <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Tomoya Fujita <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Chris Lalancette <[email protected]>
clalancette
force-pushed
the
clalancette/add-jazzy-ubuntu-jammy-tier-3
branch
from
407a78a to
5430f85
Compare
|
With #418 merged, I rebased this. Let's see if CI completes now. |
It does! I added this to the agenda for the next PMC meeting, but I might have to send out a formal notice email for the vote 1 week in advance. |
| +==============+==================+===============+==================+==============+=============+=================+================+ | ||
| | amd64 | Tier 1 [d][a][s] | Tier 1 [a][s] | Tier 2 [d][a][s] | Tier 3 [s] | Tier 3 [s] | Tier 3 [s] | Tier 3 [s] | | ||
| +--------------+------------------+---------------+------------------+--------------+-------------+-----------------+----------------+ | ||
| | arm64 | Tier 1 [d][a][s] | | | | | Tier 3 [s] | Tier 3 [s] | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we be filling down the Source builds for arm64 for Jammy and macOS like we do for Debian and Open Embedded? In Jammy? And in see the parallel in macOS and RHEL? For example I know people are working on macOS on the new Apple silicon with mixed results, but that might warrant community level support statement, and it is likely all new macOS work will be on arm64.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good question. To be honest, I'm not sure. Thinking about this a bit more, it might make sense for us to actually get rid of this table entirely and combine it with the "Dependency Requirements" one below. That is, in the "Dependency Requirements" table, instead of "Required" and "Recommended" (which more-or-less correspond to Tier 1 vs Tier 2/3), we instead make that explicitly Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3. And then we call out Ubuntu amd64 and Ubuntu arm64 as separate columns under "Tier 1". It would look something like this:
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+--------------+-----------------------+
| | Tier 1 | Tier 2 | Tier 3 |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+--------------+-----------------------+
| Package | Ubuntu 24.04 amd64 | Ubuntu 24.04 arm64 | Windows 10 amd64 | RHEL 9 amd64 | Debian Bookworm amd64 |
This would obviously have some repetition as the package versions for Ubuntu 24.04 amd64 and arm64 will be identical, but I think it would be easier to reason about since it would only be one table.
What do you think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could we move this discussion to a separate issue?
|
This was voted on and approved during the 2025-05-06 ROS PMC meeting. There's an open discussion above, but I believe that's out of scope and more of a follow-up, and could be moved to another issue. I don't have the right permissions to merge this, so I'll ask people who do. |
|
This pull request has been mentioned on ROS Discourse. There might be relevant details there: https://discourse.ros.org/t/ros-pmc-minutes-for-may-6-2025/43576/1 |
This is already called out properly as a Tier-3 supported platform on https://docs.ros.org, but we forgot to update the table here to do the same.