Adds ARROW_STRIP to Marker.msg #218
Conversation
riv-tnoble
force-pushed
the
feature/add-arrow-strip-marker-type
branch
from
eed9561 to
a2bba62
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
+1 for merging into rolling
I think it's safe for backporting too. Publishing of newer data to older implementations will break parsing (hopefully with an unknown datatype type of error) . That should gracefully degrade. If anyone knows of another case we should look into that more if there's strong interest in backporting. I suspect that backporting it will depend on the complexity of the relevant rviz pull request complexity.
riv-tnoble
force-pushed
the
feature/add-arrow-strip-marker-type
branch
from
30b68e8 to
a848561
Compare
|
Thanks @tfoote I've added a "currently unimplemented" comment for clarity. |
|
Makes sense. I should have time this week to raise a PR with rviz2. Will update this PR when merged |
|
Removed the unimplemented comment as the rviz2 PR is underway. In particular, it's waiting on whether the CI for that repo supports compiling against unmerged branches (i.e. this one) in the same way rviz1 does. If that's not possible, would you be happy for us to reverse the order of the merges? i.e. common_interfaces -> rviz? |
Signed-off-by: Tom Noble <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Tom Noble <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Tom Noble <[email protected]>
Use format codes instead of ambiguous names. Signed-off-by: Christian Rauch <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Tom Noble <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Chris Lalancette <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Tom Noble <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Tom Noble <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Yadunund <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Tom Noble <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Tom Noble <[email protected]>
riv-tnoble
force-pushed
the
feature/add-arrow-strip-marker-type
branch
from
fb2264a to
2034705
Compare
|
@clalancette are you happy with this PR ? |
|
@rr-tom-noble this PR has some conflicts, can you solve it ? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This should be rebased onto the latest, and all changes to files except for Marker.msg dropped. Then this will be a lot closer to be ready to merge (though I think we should wait for ros2/rviz#972 to be ready before we do that).
|
I've rebased this onto rolling in #242 Closing this as superseded. |
6 participants
ROS2 version of this PR: ros/common_msgs#190
I won't have a chance to work on the Rviz PR to implement the
ARROW_STRIPfunctionality for ROS2 until next month (April), so I suppose we can either leave this PR open until then, or merge with a "currently unimplemented" comment.I've changed the description above the
pointsfield to include the new type, but have left thecoloursfield unchanged as (at least in the ROS1 version of the Rviz PR) this functionality was unimplemented forARROW_STRIP.