search

LCAS / topological_navigation

The topological navigation framework
Apache License 2.0
35 stars 37 forks source link

Topological Navigation version 2 Master Branch #57

Closed Jailander closed 3 years ago

Jailander commented 3 years ago

to be merged into master when we are ready to deploy new topo nav

adambinch commented 3 years ago

@LCAS/rasberry A new version of topological navigation (topological navigation 2 - https://github.com/LCAS/topological_navigation/tree/toponav2-devel) has been developed. Myself and @Jailander think that it is now at a stage where it can be merged into the master branch, with the current master branch moved to a legacy branch. Toponav 2 should be fully backwards compatible, such that everything in RASberry master and SagaApps master should work with it. Before we proceed with the merging, it would be great if those of you who use toponav make sure that toponav 2 works for you.

I have put several people down for review who I know/think uses toponav. If I have missed anyone and you want to test it please do so. You should be able to check out this PR and run your toponav sims as you normally would do.

@Jailander @heuristicus @bfalacerda can you also test this please? Your names are not appearing in the drop down list of reviewers.

marc-hanheide commented 3 years ago

I have not tested this in detail, but generally looks alright. However, please ensure you create a new "legacy" or "v1" branch from the "master" before this is merged. I'm also thinking if we want to rename the packages? I know there is a lot of legacy software (see https://raw.githubusercontent.com/wiki/LCAS/rosdistro/repos-melodic.svg) that we may not want to all update. Wouldn't it be wiser to, e.g., include a prefix like tn2_ to the packages? Or are you confident they are fully interface-compatible? Then of course this is not required. This is to feed into a discussion mostly.

I have seen #83 but I wonder if and how many people maintaining legacy systems will be prepared to check in depth. A renaming would avoid the problem?

adambinch commented 3 years ago

I have not tested this in detail, but generally looks alright. However, please ensure you create a new "legacy" or "v1" branch from the "master" before this is merged. I'm also thinking if we want to rename the packages? I know there is a lot of legacy software (see https://raw.githubusercontent.com/wiki/LCAS/rosdistro/repos-melodic.svg) that we may not want to all update. Wouldn't it be wiser to, e.g., include a prefix like tn2_ to the packages? Or are you confident they are fully interface-compatible? Then of course this is not required. This is to feed into a discussion mostly.

I have seen #83 but I wonder if and how many people maintaining legacy systems will be prepared to check in depth. A renaming would avoid the problem?

I am confident that they are fully interface compatible, but would like others to confirm this if possible. However, renaming the packages wouldn't be too much trouble. Would like to hear from @Jailander on this ...

Jailander commented 3 years ago

A legacy branch has been created from the current version of master see: https://github.com/LCAS/topological_navigation/tree/legacy