Add recipe for lie-group-controllers

[traversaro]

Checklist

• Title of this PR is meaningful: e.g. "Adding my_nifty_package", not "updated meta.yaml".
• License file is packaged (see here for an example).
• Source is from official source.
• Package does not vendor other packages. (If a package uses the source of another package, they should be separate packages or the licenses of all packages need to be packaged).
• If static libraries are linked in, the license of the static library is packaged.
• Package does not ship static libraries. If static libraries are needed, follow CFEP-18.
• Build number is 0.
• A tarball (url) rather than a repo (e.g. git_url) is used in your recipe (see here for more details).
• GitHub users listed in the maintainer section have posted a comment confirming they are willing to be listed there.
• When in trouble, please check our knowledge base documentation before pinging a team.

[conda-forge-linter]

Hi! This is the friendly automated conda-forge-linting service.

I just wanted to let you know that I linted all conda-recipes in your PR (recipes/lie-group-controllers) and found it was in an excellent condition.

I do have some suggestions for making it better though...

For recipes/lie-group-controllers:

• License is not an SPDX identifier (or a custom LicenseRef) nor an SPDX license expression.

Documentation on acceptable licenses can be found here.

[conda-forge-linter]

Hi! This is the friendly automated conda-forge-linting service.

I just wanted to let you know that I linted all conda-recipes in your PR (recipes/lie-group-controllers) and found it was in an excellent condition.

[traversaro]

@conda-forge/help-c-cpp The recipe is ready for review.

@h-vetinari This is a C++ header-only library, do you think the output should be called liblie-group-controllers ?

[h-vetinari]

This is a C++ header-only library, do you think the output should be called liblie-group-controllers ?

I don't have a very strong opinion on this case (I'm mainly against adding more -cpps if we can help it), but leaning towards the lib prefix

[traversaro]

This is a C++ header-only library, do you think the output should be called liblie-group-controllers ?

I don't have a very strong opinion on this case (I'm mainly against adding more -cpps if we can help it), but leaning towards the lib prefix

Ack, I change the name to liblie-group-controllers.

[saraedum]

Why do you need a run exports if this is header-only?

[traversaro]

My bad, I made an error and assumed the library was not header only, I will fix this.

[traversaro]

@conda-forge/help-c-cpp @saraedum Thanks for the comments, I tried to address all your comments.