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

Update all demos using the description from topic rather than the parameter #456

Merged

Conversation

fmauch
Copy link
Contributor

@fmauch fmauch commented Feb 29, 2024

This will make sure things work after ros-controls/ros2_control#1358 is merged.

I'll update this demo by demo whenever I find the time and check the demos according to their docs after modifying them.

Since activation of the "hardware" takes some time, the resource manager
might try to write the initial NaN value to the hardware. This commit adds
a check to the write method for that.
fmauch and others added 2 commits March 2, 2024 23:58
@fmauch fmauch marked this pull request as ready for review March 2, 2024 23:24
@fmauch
Copy link
Contributor Author

fmauch commented Mar 2, 2024

Migrated all demos and manually tested them.

Copy link
Member

@saikishor saikishor left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The changes look good to me!

Let's merge once ros-controls/ros2_control#1358 is merged!

@fmauch
Copy link
Contributor Author

fmauch commented Mar 3, 2024

The changes look good to me!

Let's merge once ros-controls/ros2_control#1358 is merged!

I don't see any specific reason to wait for that, as this PR removes long-deprecated mechanisms and is in line with the docs again, but sure, it's not necessarily required before ros-controls/ros2_control#1358 is merged.

@saikishor
Copy link
Member

saikishor commented Mar 3, 2024

Sure, we can merge it. You have a point 👍🏽

Let's wait for one more approval for merging it :)

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.

LGTM, thank you for thinking of this!
should we backport this? this should work even with humble?

@christophfroehlich christophfroehlich merged commit d472f5e into ros-controls:master Mar 3, 2024
13 checks passed
@fmauch
Copy link
Contributor Author

fmauch commented Mar 3, 2024

No, this will not work on humble because we subscribe to robot_description and not ~/robot_description on rolling.

@christophfroehlich
Copy link
Contributor

No, this will not work on humble because we subscribe to robot_description and not ~/robot_description on rolling.

ah you are right. should we backport the rest?

christophfroehlich added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 13, 2024
…ameter (#456)

* Use correct remapping for iron/humble

* Updated demos

* Example 14: Check for NaN in write method

Since activation of the "hardware" takes some time, the resource manager
might try to write the initial NaN value to the hardware. This commit adds
a check to the write method for that.

---------

Co-authored-by: Sai Kishor Kothakota <saisastra3@gmail.com>
christophfroehlich added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 13, 2024
…ameter (#456)

* Use correct remapping for iron/humble

* Updated demos

* Example 14: Check for NaN in write method

Since activation of the "hardware" takes some time, the resource manager
might try to write the initial NaN value to the hardware. This commit adds
a check to the write method for that.

---------

Co-authored-by: Sai Kishor Kothakota <saisastra3@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Felix Exner (fexner) <felix_mauch@web.de>
christophfroehlich added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 13, 2024
…ameter (#456) (#472)

* Use correct remapping for iron/humble

* Updated demos

* Example 14: Check for NaN in write method

Since activation of the "hardware" takes some time, the resource manager
might try to write the initial NaN value to the hardware. This commit adds
a check to the write method for that.

---------

Co-authored-by: Sai Kishor Kothakota <saisastra3@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Felix Exner (fexner) <felix_mauch@web.de>
mergify bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 13, 2024
…ameter (#456) (#472)

* Use correct remapping for iron/humble

* Updated demos

* Example 14: Check for NaN in write method

Since activation of the "hardware" takes some time, the resource manager
might try to write the initial NaN value to the hardware. This commit adds
a check to the write method for that.

---------

Co-authored-by: Sai Kishor Kothakota <saisastra3@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Felix Exner (fexner) <felix_mauch@web.de>
(cherry picked from commit 11d699b)
christophfroehlich added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 13, 2024
…ameter (#456) (#472) (#473)

* Use correct remapping for iron/humble

* Updated demos

* Example 14: Check for NaN in write method

Since activation of the "hardware" takes some time, the resource manager
might try to write the initial NaN value to the hardware. This commit adds
a check to the write method for that.

---------

Co-authored-by: Sai Kishor Kothakota <saisastra3@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Felix Exner (fexner) <felix_mauch@web.de>
(cherry picked from commit 11d699b)

Co-authored-by: Christoph Fröhlich <christophfroehlich@users.noreply.github.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants