Build for ogre 1.12

[Tobias-Fischer]

Checklist

• Used a fork of the feedstock to propose changes
• Bumped the build number (if the version is unchanged)

Fix #15

I am not sure whether it's a good idea to bump ogre to 1.12 for everyone, or if it's better to create two branches, one for ogre 1.10 and another for ogre 1.12. In case of multi branches, I have no idea how to deal with the version numbers etc.

[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 (recipe) and found it was in an excellent condition.

[traversaro]

I am not sure whether it's a good idea to bump ogre to 1.12 for everyone, or if it's better to create two branches, one for ogre 1.10 and another for ogre 1.12. In case of multi branches, I have no idea how to deal with the version numbers etc.

Hi @Tobias-Fischer ! As (I think) one of the few users of Gazebo built with Ogre 1.12 (in https://github.com/robotology/robotology-superbuild-dependencies-vcpkg), there are several downsides in using Ogre 1.12 for now (some of them are discussed in gazebosim/gazebo-classic#2726):

• No shadow and texture blending when rendering terrain Terrain rendering does not support shadows and texture blending with Ogre >= 1.11 gazebosim/gazebo-classic#2686
• Failure in re-spawning a model if it contains external meshes (I still need to prepare a mre and open a bug for this in Gazebo)

So Gazebo11+Ogre1.12 usable, but if you can choose probably Ogre 1.10 is still the safe choice.

[Tobias-Fischer]

Hey @traversaro,
Good to hear from you! Thanks for those insights - I wasn't aware that @wolfv previously tried to build Gazebo with Ogre 1.12. We better wait for better support / more fixes from Gazebo then, there does not seem to be much point to take this PR any further.