Consider updating to ament_export_targets (Modern CMake) about behaviortree.cpp HOT 8 OPEN

I will happily accept your contributions.

from behaviortree.cpp.

I will test for this scenaio, and probably can add a CI check for it. It should be fixed.

from behaviortree.cpp.

I ran into a blocker, sorry. Issue linked above. The decision to use BT:: as the exported namespace for conan builds is not supported yet in ament_export_targets. ament_export_targets hard codes the project name as the namespace, which is more common convention.

In order to keep the usage semantics the same (BT::BT::behaviortree_cpp everywhere), this issue will need to be put on hold till upstream has a recommendation.

If we rushed this in with a different namespace, then you'd have a support/documentation fiasco and downstream portable code would be annoying to write to account for both target names.

ROS users should continue to use ament_target_dependencies for the time being, despite it not supporting PRIVATE linkage.

I've submitted an PR upstream. Once that goes in, we can revisit this issue.

from behaviortree.cpp.

I found a related problem here that causes linking to fail if there are two installations of this library: one in system (e.g., /opt/ros/{version} via ros-{version}-behaviortree-cpp and one cloned in your workspace). Because ament_export_dependencies(ament_index_cpp) comes before ament_export_include_directories(include), the resulting ${behaviortree_cpp_INCLUDE_DIRS} has /opt/ros/{version}/include before /path/to/local/install/behaviortree_cpp/include, so downstream users of the library link to symbols in /opt/ros/{version}/include instead of /path/to/local/install/behaviortree_cpp/include.

Does this get resolved with a move to ament_export_targets that also removes ament_export_include_directories, or does it remain? I'm thinking that it fixes it, because the exported target should have /path/to/local/install/behaviortree_cpp/include before /opt/ros/{version}/include in its interface include directories, but I'm unsure.

from behaviortree.cpp.

@Ryanf55 if we can fix this the next week, it would be ideal, I want to release 4.6

from behaviortree.cpp.

@Ryanf55 if we can fix this the next week, it would be ideal, I want to release 4.6

Yes. It merged to rolling last week, but CI failed on the iron/humble backport for unrelated reasons. After a re-run, it should be good (in theory). I don't have permissions for a re-run.

from behaviortree.cpp.