1.11.0 Release

[kunaltyagi]

Context

Next version release with backlog items + new features.

Backlog from #2772 (1.10.0 Release)

• memory Transition to standard smart pointers #2792

Backlog moved to 1.12.0 Release pending discussion regarding the status of random in PCL (#3996)

• random generators Replace boost::mt19937 with std::mt19937 #2803 Use random generator from C++11 instead of from Boost in module sample_consensus #2963 Use random generator from C++11 instead of from Boost in module filters #2964 Inconsistent handling of default seed in NormalGenerator & UniformGenerator  #2985 Use C++11 random generator instead of Boost in RangeLikelihood #2988 Replace UuidGenerator of Boost in OutofcoreOctreeDiskContainer #2955

PS: It might be more prudent to do a faster release since 1.9.1 was on 2018 Nov 26 and 1.10 was on 2020 Jan 20. Scheduled releases might be better (aka every N months, come hell or high water) to prevent huge changes and giving something new every release. Some will be small, some will be large; doesn't matter.

[taketwo]

I recall discussing scheduled (aka "regular") releases quite a few times. Let's see how far we get this time :)

I'd like to have 1.10.1 soon because we had some header issues in 1.10.0.

[kunaltyagi]

What's blocking 1.10.1? Doing it before GSoC kicks would be best. There's already a lot of commits since 1.10, some might be breaking API/ABI (don't remember which one. It would be one of mine though)

[taketwo]

some might be breaking API/ABI

At least none are labeled as such: https://github.com/PointCloudLibrary/pcl/pulls?page=2&q=is%3Apr+merged%3A%3E2020-01-19&utf8=%E2%9C%93

What's blocking 1.10.1?

I want to try to build a large codebase that uses plenty of PCL. Some ROS packages and proprietary projects at my company. So far no time :(

[tompollok]

Is it planned to completely deboostify pcl with 1.11 release?

[kunaltyagi]

We're on track to do that, but I don't know when we plan to flip the switch.

EDIT: De-boostify in terms of features that are provided by C++14 only. Boost is and remains an important ecosystem on which PCL depends

[kunaltyagi]

@taketwo you mentioned you compile PCL for some open (and closed) source projects. Which ones are those? That'll help in creating a release pipeline

[taketwo]

At my company, we use a lot of PCL+ROS. We package PCL ourselves, as well as those ROS packages that depend on it.

[kunaltyagi]

IIRC, PCL is an indirect dependency of other ROS packages, via the package perception_pcl. Just compiling perception_pcl would be sufficient for starters, right?

[taketwo]

Here is what I get with $ apt-cache rdepends --installed libpcl-dev | uniq on my system (proprietary packages stripped):

  ros-melodic-cartographer-ros
  ros-melodic-pcl-ros
  ros-melodic-pcl-conversions

So yes, I think perception_pcl would be sufficient for starters.

[kunaltyagi]

Note to self: kinetic and melodic are the active distributions

[kunaltyagi]

Where can I find the cmake flags used in configuration for debian release?

[jspricke]

https://sources.debian.org/src/pcl/1.10.1+dfsg-1/debian/rules/
and dpkg-buildflags

[SergioRAgostinho]

Debian is building its packages with clang 😮

[jspricke]

https://salsa.debian.org/science-team/pcl/-/commit/0cf19f69887891f6fcdf43863e49dcc608cc62c4