Closed ben47955 closed 1 month ago
It would be important to signal to readers of the rules that there would be a delay to be finalised in the referee meeting so that no teams write their code on the expectation of no delay.
From: sseering @.> Sent: Friday 10 May 2024 09:29 To: RoboCup-SPL/Rules @.> Cc: Subscribed @.***> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [RoboCup-SPL/Rules] Adding state before initial (PR #153)
Warning
This email originated from outside of Maynooth University's Mail System. Do not reply, click links or open attachments unless you recognise the sender and know the content is safe.
@sseering commented on this pull request.
In rules/game_process.texhttps://github.com/RoboCup-SPL/Rules/pull/153#discussion_r1596446810:
@@ -75,6 +78,8 @@ \subsection{Robot States} \label{fig:robot_states} \end{figure}
+The referee must tell the GameController operator to switch to \texttt{initial} state once everyone is in place or that teams are falling under forfeit rule (see \cref{sec:forfeit}). +The referee should wait between 10 to 120 seconds before announcing the transition to \texttt{ready}.
If we handle this during the referee meeting, then we could not give any time in the rules. Keeping it simpler.
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/RoboCup-SPL/Rules/pull/153#discussion_r1596446810, or unsubscribehttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AA56EEXGTVFL35PAWIHJYMTZBSAOBAVCNFSM6AAAAABHC2Z4ICVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43YUDVNRWFEZLROVSXG5CSMV3GSZLXHMZDANBZGU4DMNRTGM. You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: @.***>
Hello, I made change to the PR
Change are ready to by reviewed
The GameController knows the setup state now (when built from the current master). Maybe you can check whether it is compatible with your intentions?
Does the TC have an opinion whether it should be possible to take a timeout in the new state?
Does the TC have an opinion whether it should be possible to take a timeout in the new state?
I don't really see how we can forbid them while still allowing them in Ready. But we will have a word on that.
Name of the state updated again along others comments
Does the TC have an opinion whether it should be possible to take a timeout in the new state?
I don't really see how we can forbid them while still allowing them in Ready. But we will have a word on that.
That makes sense.
Implementing #152