[libcamera-devel] [PATCH v2] package metadata

[Kieran Bingham]

Hi Christian,

Quoting Christian Rauch via libcamera-devel (2022-08-15 20:12:31)
> Hi Kieran,
> 
> Am 15.08.22 um 10:18 schrieb Kieran Bingham:
> > Quoting Christian Rauch via libcamera-devel (2022-08-13 13:31:18)
> >> This metadata file provides information, amongst others, about the version,
> >> licence, maintainers and build dependencies. This file is used by build
> >> systems (catkin, colcon) to manage a dependency graph and resolve those
> >> dependencies automatically.
> >>
> >> The file structure is defined at: https://www.ros.org/reps/rep-0149.html
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Christian Rauch <Rauch.Christian at gmx.de>
> >> ---
> >>  package.xml | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>  1 file changed, 31 insertions(+)
> >>  create mode 100644 package.xml
> >>
> >> diff --git a/package.xml b/package.xml
> >> new file mode 100644
> >> index 00000000..2264efd9
> >> --- /dev/null
> >> +++ b/package.xml
> >> @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
> >
> > Do we need to add any licence information in here?, or in .reuse/dep5 at
> > all?
> 
> The licence information should go into the tag "license" (see below).

I meant for this file specifically. As in - Does this need to add an
SPDX header.

> >
> >> +<?xml version="1.0"?>
> >> +<?xml-model href="http://download.ros.org/schema/package_format3.xsd" schematypens="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"?>
> >> +<package format="3">
> >> +  <name>libcamera</name>
> >> +
> >> +  <version>0.0.0</version>
> >
> > If this file was generated by meson, it could populate this field. But I
> > fear that's a bit 'chicken and egg'.
> 
> This file is parsed before the build is started. Otherwise, required
> dependencies couldn't be fetched or built before.
> 
> >
> > How does ROS handle sources? Does it include libcamera as a subproject?
> > or using the repo tool perhaps?
> 
> Either way. You can check out the libcamera as part of your workspace
> (that's what I am currently doing) and then have it automatically built
> (by catkin or colcon) if it is required by another project, or you can
> distribute a binary version of it in the ROS repo and have it fetched
> via rosdep. Anyway, the dependency information is required such that
> rosdep can download required dependences or colcon can build packages in
> the right order.
> 
> >
> >> +  <description>An open source camera stack and framework for Linux, Android, and ChromeOS</description>
> >> +
> >> +  <maintainer email="libcamera-devel at lists.libcamera.org">libcamera project</maintainer>
> >> +
> >> +  <license>LGPL-2.1</license>
> >
> > That's correct for the library itself, but not the utilities or other
> > toolings. And the IPA modules have different licence constraints.
> >
> > Does a package.xml file have the ability to state multiple licences, or
> > specify what the license applies to?
> >
> Good point. You can specify multiple licences [1] by using the "license"
> tag multiple times. I think for mixed licencing, you are supposed to add
> a "SPDX Identifier" [2] to the top of every file in order to make this
> machine-readable.

Yes, SPDX headers are used extensively in libcamera, but is not added to
this file.

> [1] https://www.ros.org/reps/rep-0149.html#license-multiple-but-at-least-one
> [2] https://spdx.org/licenses/
> >
> >> +
> >> +  <url>https://libcamera.org</url>
> >> +
> >> +  <buildtool_depend>python3-meson-pip</buildtool_depend>
> >> +  <buildtool_depend>ninja-build</buildtool_depend>
> >> +  <buildtool_depend>pkg-config</buildtool_depend>
> >> +
> >> +  <build_depend>python3-yaml</build_depend>
> >> +  <build_depend>python3-ply</build_depend>
> >> +  <build_depend>python3-jinja2</build_depend>
> >> +
> >> +  <depend>yaml</depend>
> >> +  <depend>libgnutls28-dev</depend>
> >> +  <depend>libudev-dev</depend>
> >> +
> >> +  <export>
> >> +    <build_type>meson</build_type>
> >> +  </export>
> >> +</package>
> >> --
> >> 2.34.1
> >>