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

tf2: Standardize a convention to replace the tf_prefix API #32

Open
jbohren opened this issue Oct 21, 2013 · 4 comments
Open

tf2: Standardize a convention to replace the tf_prefix API #32

jbohren opened this issue Oct 21, 2013 · 4 comments

Comments

@jbohren
Copy link
Member

jbohren commented Oct 21, 2013

The migration guide leaves this as a "longer term solution" but I think there are a lot of people who use and rely on tf_prefix for multi-robot (even single-master) systems, like modular robots. I think having a way to scope a node, or a component, or a namespace to a specific TF namespace is too common a problem to leave to each individual application.

@NikolausDemmel
Copy link

Are there any ideas how this should look like?

The tf2 design page still mentions tf_prefix as the solution for multiple robots. It later contradicts this by stating that tf_prefix has been removed.

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Aug 31, 2018

Just wondering if there has been any update or workaround for this? I am dealing with a multi-robot simulation that implements moveit, and I came across this issue on moveit's repository which is caused by the deprecation of tf_prefix.

lucasw pushed a commit to lucasw/geometry2 that referenced this issue Nov 14, 2018
* Deduped node handle, allowing callbacks to work

* Cleaned up print output

* Addressed minor style comments

* Deleted extra whitespace
@Toms42
Copy link

Toms42 commented Feb 3, 2020

Any updates on a replacement? Since tf was deprecated it seems there is no way to apply a prefix from a launchfile and instead it has to be manually added in the code?

@agoeckner
Copy link

Has anybody given further thought to this?

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

No branches or pull requests

5 participants