Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[CM] Remove support for the description parameter and use only ~/robot_description topic #1358

Open
wants to merge 5 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

destogl
Copy link
Member

@destogl destogl commented Feb 1, 2024

Part of the #1237.

Has to be adjusted after #1354 is merged.

@fmauch
Copy link
Contributor

fmauch commented Feb 1, 2024

May I raise the question (has probably been discussed elsewhere, but I couldn't find a note in #940): Why do we subscribe to ~/robot_description? Isn't the usual workflow that we have /robot_state_publisher and /controller_manager, where /robot_state_publisher publishes /robot_description? This would leave everyone having to remap controller_manager/robot_description in their launchfiles. Am I missing something or is this intended behavior?

If we instead subscribed to robot_description there would not necessarily be any migration necessary, once we merge this, as CM will silently use the description topic from the joint state publisher instead of the parameter that people might still send to the CM node. In that case they just would have to remove the parameter and that's it.

@destogl
Copy link
Member Author

destogl commented Feb 2, 2024

May I raise the question (has probably been discussed elsewhere, but I couldn't find a note in #940): Why do we subscribe to ~/robot_description? Isn't the usual workflow that we have /robot_state_publisher and /controller_manager, where /robot_state_publisher publishes /robot_description? This would leave everyone having to remap controller_manager/robot_description in their launchfiles. Am I missing something or is this intended behavior?

This is intended, but soley by myself :)

The idea was to work with the local namespace. Reading your comment, you are right. for the cases where one has multiple controller managers, one should remap those instead making people to do remapping by default.

@fmauch
Copy link
Contributor

fmauch commented Feb 2, 2024

so... should we change that?

@destogl
Copy link
Member Author

destogl commented Feb 2, 2024

so... should we change that?

I'll adjust!

@saikishor
Copy link
Member

So when using multiple controller managers, we remap the topic within the launch file like this?

remappings=[
            ('/robot_description', '/custom_1/robot_description'),
        ]

Am I right?

@destogl
Copy link
Member Author

destogl commented Feb 2, 2024

So when using multiple controller managers, we remap the topic within the launch file like this?

remappings=[
            ('/robot_description', '/custom_1/robot_description'),
        ]

Am I right?

That's the idea.

Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Feb 25, 2024

This pull request is in conflict. Could you fix it @destogl?

@fmauch
Copy link
Contributor

fmauch commented Feb 28, 2024

This pull request is in conflict. Could you fix it @destogl?

I'll make a PR to this PR's branch as mentioned in #1410


Edit: Looking into the conflicts present, my changes seem to be causing only minor issues so I think we should wait for #1354 and then fix all conflicts at once.

Copy link
Contributor

@christophfroehlich christophfroehlich left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Apr 29, 2024

This pull request is in conflict. Could you fix it @destogl?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants