Add rosdep rules for two manually uploaded packages

I compiled in my PC two new packages, and manually uploaded to Artifactory.

Here the rosdep rules to resolve them.

rosdistro/rosdep_tecnalia.yaml

@@ -8,6 +8,10 @@ libpcl-1.8.1:
   ubuntu:
     xenial: [libpcl1.8.1]
 
+libpcl-1.9.1:
+  ubuntu:
+    xenial: [libpcl1.9.1]
+
 peak:
   ubuntu: [libpeak-dev]
 
@@ -134,3 +138,7 @@ rcobjectdetection_shape_thomas:
 rc_cv_utils:
   ubuntu:
     xenial: [ros-kinetic-rc-cv-utils]
+
+vtk_7.1:
+  ubuntu:
+    xenial: [libvtk-7.1]

[Prada Sarasola, Miguel]

It would help avoid confusion if this was named vtk-7.1, since all existing rosdep rules use hyphens instead of underscores.

[Jon Azpiazu]

I'd say it is a bit heterogeneous right now (e.g. libpcl-1.8.1 vs robotnik_base_hw_lib).

For ROS packages at least, the rule is to use underscores in the rosdep key, and hyphens in the package name, which is what I was trying to follow.

But it is quite chaotic already, so I leave it up to you.

[Prada Sarasola, Miguel]

The issue is that we're abusing the rosdep definitions for ROS packages, which are declared differently in the official rosdistro repo, right?

I assume libvtk is not a ROS package, though, so I would go for vtk-7.1 as key, to be coherent with the non-ROS-package rosdep key naming convention.

What do you think of separating ROS vs non-ROS (system?) dependency declarations into different files?

[Jon Azpiazu]

Looking at some examples at base.yaml, I'd go for libtk1.7. Rationale: there is already a libvtk, and in some other cases the version number is not separated for the package name itself (e.g. gstreamer1.0 or libzmq3-dev). Also the -dev suffix looks only useful if there is a separation between runtime and devel, which is not the case.

[Prada Sarasola, Miguel]

Sounds good to me.