feat(autoware_vehicle_info_utils): porting from universe to core

[NorahXiong]

Description

We are porting autoware_vehicle_info_utils to autoware.core, and this PR adds the package to core.

Following modification were added:

• reset version in package.xml and remove CHANGELOG.rst
• modify include file directory structure to match with Autoware Coding Guideline

This must be merged with this PR which removes the package in Autoware Universe.

Related links

Parent Issue:

• Issue Link Port 'autoware_vehicle_info_utils' and 'autoware_universe_utils' from Autoware Universe to Autoware Core #131
• feat(autoware_vehicle_info_utils): move autoware_vehicle_info_utils to autoware.core autoware.universe#9694

How was this PR tested?

It is tested using TIER IV evaluator: https://evaluation.ci.tier4.jp/evaluation/reports/ad7243c5-c593-5ed0-8075-c3bc57f60d22?project_id=prd_jt

Notes for reviewers

None.

Interface changes

None.

Effects on system behavior

None.

[github-actions]

Thank you for contributing to the Autoware project!

🚧 If your pull request is in progress, switch it to draft mode.

Please ensure:

• You've checked our contribution guidelines.
• Your PR follows our pull request guidelines.
• All required CI checks pass before marking the PR ready for review.

[liuXinGangChina]

mits san and kondo san @mitsudome-r @youtalk

Since Kang is still having his holiday, We close the original pr and create this new pr which include the modification that mits san required today.

Best regards

心刚

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 55.44554% with 45 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 71.68%. Comparing base (4cb18f5) to head (4b1536a).
Report is 41 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...n/autoware_vehicle_info_utils/src/vehicle_info.cpp	54.34%	18 Missing and 3 partials ⚠️
...ehicle_info_utils/test/test_vehicle_info_utils.cpp	40.62%	0 Missing and 19 partials ⚠️
...ware_vehicle_info_utils/src/vehicle_info_utils.cpp	77.27%	4 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #183      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   78.75%   71.68%   -7.08%     
==========================================
  Files          11       14       +3     
  Lines         193      279      +86     
  Branches       73      118      +45     
==========================================
+ Hits          152      200      +48     
- Misses         11       31      +20     
- Partials       30       48      +18     

Flag	Coverage Δ		*Carryforward flag
differential	55.44% <55.44%> (?)
total	80.89% <ø> (+2.14%)	⬆️	Carriedforward from a11a066

*This pull request uses carry forward flags. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

needs another review

[mitsudome-r]

I get errors when I try to build this with Autoware.Universe.
It seems like the modifications for changing autoware_universe_utils to autoware_utils functions are causing errors in dependent packages.

[liuXinGangChina]

I get errors when I try to build this with Autoware.Universe. It seems like the modifications for changing autoware_universe_utils to autoware_utils functions are causing errors in dependent packages.

Got it, mits san @mitsudome-r

I will look into this one with Norah

Have a nice weekend!

心刚

[sasakisasaki]

Thank you for your contribution! It seems there are some duplicated headers as follows. Could you fix please?

vehicle_info.hpp

The same name header exists as follows:

• common/autoware_vehicle_info_utils/include/autoware/vehicle_info_utils/vehicle_info.hpp
• common/autoware_vehicle_info_utils/include/autoware_vehicle_info_utils/vehicle_info.hpp

vehicle_info_utils.hpp

The same name header exists as follows:

• common/autoware_vehicle_info_utils/include/autoware/vehicle_info_utils/vehicle_info_utils.hpp
• common/autoware_vehicle_info_utils/include/autoware_vehicle_info_utils/vehicle_info_utils.hpp

[sasakisasaki]

The reason why we observe the following error (EDITED: described in bottom of this my comment) is:

• The original autoware_vehicle_info_utils has the dependency for autoware_universe_utils (see the attached screenshot below)
• The autoware_collision_detector has the dependency for autoware_vehicle_info_utils, but does not have the dependency for the autoware_universe_utils while autoware_collision_detector is using autoware_universe_utils
• Thus, the autoware_collision_detector was using the autoware_universe_utils via autoware_vehicle_info_utils

@mitsudome-r So I guess something like as follows looks needed on the universe side. Do you have any nice idea for resolving this issue? Thanks!

• On the universe side, fix so the autoware_collision_detector uses autoware_utils
• Add the dependency autoware_universe_utils for autoware_collision_detector

Screenshot that of this PR

Error

***/src/autoware/universe/control/autoware_collision_detector/include/autoware/collision_detector/node.hpp:18:10: fatal error: autoware/universe_utils/ros/polling_subscriber.hpp: No such file or directory
   18 | #include <autoware/universe_utils/ros/polling_subscriber.hpp>
      |          ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
compilation terminated.
gmake[2]: *** [CMakeFiles/autoware_collision_detector.dir/build.make:76: CMakeFiles/autoware_collision_detector.dir/src/node.cpp.o] Error 1
gmake[1]: *** [CMakeFiles/Makefile2:139: CMakeFiles/autoware_collision_detector.dir/all] Error 2
gmake: *** [Makefile:146: all] Error 2
---
Failed   <<< autoware_collision_detector [3.54s, exited with code 2]

Summary: 18 packages finished [12.3s]
  1 package failed: autoware_collision_detector
  1 package had stderr output: autoware_collision_detector

[sasakisasaki]

Including me, our reviewer will also check if there is no any missing stuff. On your side, please fill "How was this PR tested?" in the PR description to prevent from something unexpected regression. Thank you!

[sasakisasaki]

I'm now preparing a PR for resolving the autoware_collision_detector's dependency.

[mitsudome-r]

This must be merged after: autowarefoundation/autoware.universe#10167

[sasakisasaki]

@NorahXiong As this PR is kind of a breaking change, please enhance the PR description as mentioned here. Careful checks can be done with the information described in the PR description. If no assumed information is provided, it'll be difficult to handle an urgent situation (e.g. fixing build error by manual operation, revert back some changes, ... etc).

[NorahXiong]

@NorahXiong As this PR is kind of a breaking change, please enhance the PR description as mentioned here. Careful checks can be done with the information described in the PR description. If no assumed information is provided, it'll be difficult to handle an urgent situation (e.g. fixing build error by manual operation, revert back some changes, ... etc).

@sasakisasaki I thought it was a refactor guideline(mentioned here).

@mitsudome-r Sorry for not building the whole project after the intermediate submission because I didn't notice the autoware.universe CICD was not actually triggerred. I will strictly follow the test procedures.

[mitsudome-r]

@NorahXiong Thanks. Current Autoware.Universe CI isn't capable of detecting removed packages as modified package. We would like to fix in the future, but it would be nice if you can test it locally for the meantime.

[youtalk]

The duplicated headers are for the backward compatibility. LGTM

[youtalk]

I've committed 4b1536a to resolve the pre-commit problem.

As the review for the target files are performed

[sasakisasaki]

The remaining points we need to ensure are:

• Improvement of the PR description (merge strategy, how this is tested, ... etc)
  • This becomes important when the urgent situation on where we need to trace the change history and its reasons
• Tests by evaluator on the universe side succeeds

After solving all these stuffs, I think we can merge all the dependency-involved PR"s" at the same time.

[mitsudome-r]

I'm testing on TIER IV evaluator here: https://evaluation.ci.tier4.jp/evaluation/reports/ad7243c5-c593-5ed0-8075-c3bc57f60d22?project_id=prd_jt

[mitsudome-r]

@sasakisasaki I have updated the PR description.