-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 72
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
ROS2 client for navigation2 #106
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Aaron Chong <aaronchongth@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Aaron Chong <aaronchongth@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Aaron Chong <aaronchongth@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Elias De Coninck <elias@tractonomy.com>
Signed-off-by: Elias De Coninck <elias@tractonomy.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hello! Thank you for the initiative, I did a quick review of the code, and tried out the minor tests. Other than the minor comments I have given, it is generally good to merge.
I have been putting together a simulation example for this client as well, which I will merge in after this gets merged. And possibly fix minor things like linting and documentation.
Signed-off-by: Elias De Coninck <elias@tractonomy.com>
Signed-off-by: Elias De Coninck <elias@tractonomy.com>
Thanks for the review. For the |
I'm not familiar with Nav2 so I apologize if this comment is noise, but one thing to watch out for if you use a We have some improvements in development that will make the commander smart enough to know information like "I can safely have the robot move through some [ x, y, z ] sequence of waypoints with any timing and no risk of conflicts happening", but the current system doesn't have that intelligence yet, so it's sensitive to the timing. |
That's a good point. With
Conclusion: I'll wait until these new features are included before changing the behavior. |
Thanks for getting back so quickly, @eliasdc! That certainly sounds like it will make navigation through a path much smoother! However as @mxgrey pointed out, the time at which the robot is expected to arrive at the pose or wait on the pose is critical to work with RMF, hence it might not be a good idea. I see that Again thanks for the help so far, I will merge this, and I'll get some documentation and simulation examples in. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM!
I think it'll be great to switch to |
Implemented feature
ROS 2 navigation stack client #84
Implementation description
The implementation replicates the behavior of the ROS1 free fleet client targeting the
main
branch, as thedevelop
branch is still under active development.We could not wait for the refactoring results of
develop
, but I'll be glad to refactor this code once it's done.