debian package

[asmodehn]

This issue gather information about the effort to create a debian package from packages using catkin_pure_python.

catkin_pure_python follows the usual python workflow, so creating pip packages is trivial, but creating debian packages (like catkin does) is not.

[asmodehn]

First try with CPack : we are not using cmake install commands to install python package, so CPack doesnt work.

We should try instead to plug into the usual catkin->deb workflow if possible...

Or maybe the ubuntu launchpad->deb workflow, independently of catkin and ROS (our usecase from pyros-setup). We might need this if we cannot configure what we need from the catkin->deb workflow

Another option could be to investigate pip->deb workflows (pybuild ? fpm? dh-virtualenv?)

[asmodehn]

Latest caktin_pure_python commit actually change a bit the feature...
pip packages are supported for devel.
but for install space, dependencies must be satisfied in another way (debs, already existing in python env...).
That allows us to build a package from a recent python package, just like the original catkin.
Hopefully this will mean that debian packaging becomes trivial for recent python package, by plugging ourselves into the bloom / ros workflow.

[asmodehn]

This need has evolved. check #18

The plan is to build an "empty" deb package, with only a package.xml that tells rosdep to go and retrieve it from pip...

[asmodehn]

Need has evolved again. building a deb package is easy enough via a third party repo, and should be done like this to avoid any suprising / too specific of a deb package behavior. => minimize the unexpected.

[asmodehn]

The current workflow seems to work fine. Building a debian package the usual catkin way, but using setuptools with the proper option seems to be the best option.

Closing.