search

gazebosim / ros_gz

Integration between ROS (1 and 2) and Gazebo simulation
https://gazebosim.org
Apache License 2.0
261 stars 139 forks source link

Add a way to pass extra parameters to ros_gz_bridge #628

Closed Amronos closed 2 days ago

Amronos commented 3 weeks ago

🎉 New feature

Closes #624

Summary

Added a new argument bridge_params to allow users to pass extra parameters to ros_gz_bridge when using the launch file. An example of these parameters would be qos_overrides I have changed the node declarations to an opaque function so that I can get the value of bridge_params. bridge_params is converted from string to dictionary and then passed to the parameters of the ros_gz_bridge node. The way I have done all of this is complicated and so please do tell me if there is an easier way to do this.

Test it

To test this something like the following command can be used: ros2 launch ros_gz_bridge ros_gz_bridge.launch.py bridge_name:=ros_gz_bridge config_file:=<path_to_your_YAML_file> bridge_params:="'qos_overrides./topic_name.publisher.durability': 'transient_local', 'qos_overrides./another_topic_name.publisher.durability': 'transient_local'"

Then to check if the qos overrides have applied: ros2 topic info /topic_name --verbose ros2 topic info /another_topic_name --verbose

Checklist

Note to maintainers: Remember to use Squash-Merge and edit the commit message to match the pull request summary while retaining Signed-off-by messages.

azeey commented 3 weeks ago

I haven't had time to dig into this, but it feels like a big code change for a fairly small feature. Is it the conversion from string to dictionary that requires the use of the opaque function? Another approach I would consider is moving more of the logic into the gz_server Action or even reverting the current architecture where the Action includes a launch file https://github.com/gazebosim/ros_gz/blob/2658f27fbea5dd14af2c47ac787071b4772c2757/ros_gz_bridge/ros_gz_bridge/actions/ros_gz_bridge.py#L146-L150

and instead have the ros_gz_bridge.launch.py file use the Action. It seems like we have more flexibility there.

Amronos commented 3 weeks ago

Is it the conversion from string to dictionary that requires the use of the opaque function?

Yes.

or even reverting the current architecture where the Action includes a launch file and instead have the ros_gz_bridge.launch.py file use the Action. It seems like we have more flexibility there.

That does sound like a good idea.

Amronos commented 1 week ago

Any updates on this PR?

Amronos commented 1 week ago

Does this test work for you? (remember to update the path to the bridge config file).

ros2 launch ros_gz_sim ros_gz_sim.launch bridge_name:=ros_gz_bridge config_file:=/home/caguero/ros_gz_ws/src/ros_gz/ros_gz_bridge/test/config/full.yaml world_sdf_file:=empty.sdf use_composition:=True create_own_container:=True

I haven't specifically run this command, but I have used the ros_gz_sim.launch.py launch file inside another python launch file with composition enabled.

caguero commented 1 week ago

Does this test work for you? (remember to update the path to the bridge config file).

ros2 launch ros_gz_sim ros_gz_sim.launch bridge_name:=ros_gz_bridge config_file:=/home/caguero/ros_gz_ws/src/ros_gz/ros_gz_bridge/test/config/full.yaml world_sdf_file:=empty.sdf use_composition:=True create_own_container:=True

I haven't specifically run this command, but I have used the ros_gz_sim.launch.py launch file inside another python launch file with composition enabled.

I'm getting an error that I don't get with the ros2 branch:

[INFO] [launch]: All log files can be found below /home/caguero/.ros/log/2024-11-14-17-40-26-288785-cold-1915140
[INFO] [launch]: Default logging verbosity is set to INFO
[ERROR] [launch]: Caught exception in launch (see debug for traceback): 'str' object has no attribute 'perform'
Amronos commented 1 week ago

The XML launch file should work now. Should I add the bridge_params argument to the other launch files?

caguero commented 1 week ago

The XML launch file should work now. Should I add the bridge_params argument to the other launch files?

That'd be great!

Amronos commented 1 week ago

Should be ready to merge now!

caguero commented 4 days ago

@Amronos , out of curiosity, were you able to solve the latest issue (duplicated nodes)?

Amronos commented 3 days ago

@Amronos , out of curiosity, were you able to solve the latest issue (duplicated nodes)?

Yes, it was fixed in commit f2d6cda. The PR should be ready to merge.

Amronos commented 1 day ago

@caguero Can this also be backported to Jazzy? If yes, #629 should be backported first.

ahcorde commented 1 day ago

https://github.com/Mergifyio backport jazzy

mergify[bot] commented 1 day ago

backport jazzy

✅ Backports have been created

* [#648 Add a way to pass extra parameters to ros_gz_bridge (backport #628)](https://github.com/gazebosim/ros_gz/pull/648) has been created for branch `jazzy`