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

[backport dashing] fix showing duplicate keys in --print-pairs #230

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

dirk-thomas
Copy link
Member

Backport of #225.

Signed-off-by: Dirk Thomas <dirk-thomas@users.noreply.github.com>
@dirk-thomas dirk-thomas added the bug Something isn't working label Dec 5, 2019
@dirk-thomas dirk-thomas self-assigned this Dec 5, 2019
@@ -58,10 +58,10 @@ get_2to1_mapping(
const std::string & ros2_type_name,
std::string & ros1_type_name);

std::map<std::string, std::string>
std::multimap<std::string, std::string>
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This API change is necessary to get the necessary information to fix --print-pairs. Either we are ok with that API breakage (and notify users in the sync email about it) or we should close this backport and leave the --print-pairs in the broken state in Dashing.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I would vote for closing to avoid API changes, or add a new function (different name) only in dashing and update our code to use that one instead.

Copy link
Member

@nuclearsandwich nuclearsandwich left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This changes a public interface and so is not ABI/API compatible with Dashing.

In the interest of not breaking ABI without a strong justification, I think we need to leave the bug here (and log it in the Known Issues) but if consensus among @ros2/team is that breaking ABI to fix the bug is worth it I will rescind my objection.

Copy link
Member

@jacobperron jacobperron left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It doesn't seem like a critical bug, so I'd say it's not worth breaking API/ABI.

@dirk-thomas
Copy link
Member Author

Ok, with 3 x 👎 I will close this backport. Thanks for the feedback.

@dirk-thomas dirk-thomas closed this Dec 5, 2019
@dirk-thomas dirk-thomas deleted the dirk-thomas/backport-dashing-225 branch December 5, 2019 19:33
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants