-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 324
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
[JTC] Process tolerances sent with action goal (backport #716) #1190
Conversation
(cherry picked from commit 07061f9) # Conflicts: # doc/migration/Jazzy.rst # doc/release_notes/Jazzy.rst
Cherry-pick of 07061f9 has failed:
To fix up this pull request, you can check it out locally. See documentation: https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/collaborating-with-pull-requests/reviewing-changes-in-pull-requests/checking-out-pull-requests-locally |
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## iron #1190 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 86.93% 86.74% -0.19%
==========================================
Files 91 92 +1
Lines 7937 8347 +410
Branches 692 699 +7
==========================================
+ Hits 6900 7241 +341
- Misses 789 851 +62
- Partials 248 255 +7
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
|
I fixed the merge conflict with the release notes, and removed all entries which are not applicable to this branch. |
From here:
This PR proposes a way how to process the tolerances: The tolerances from one action goal are not saved for the next one, but the default ones will be used if no tolerances are set with the following action goals.
(Temporary) deactivation is also implemented like documented in the msg definition.
From the node parameter we cannot set velocity or acceleration tolerances (except for a single
stopped_velocity_tolerance
for the goal tolerances of all joints). Should we add them as parameters as well, to have the same structure like the action message?This new feature could break some existing projects, because the tolerances were just ignored and might now be breaking behaviors. Should we introduce a temporary parameter to opt-in?
Fixes #249
This is an automatic backport of pull request #716 done by Mergify.