Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Deprecated BoxedLcpConstraintSolver constructor should be API backward compatible #1288

Closed
jslee02 opened this issue Apr 24, 2019 · 1 comment
Closed

Deprecated BoxedLcpConstraintSolver constructor should be API backward compatible #1288

jslee02 opened this issue Apr 24, 2019 · 1 comment
Labels
type: bug Indicates an unexpected problem or unintended behavior
Milestone
DART 6.8.2

Comments

@jslee02
Copy link
Member

jslee02 commented Apr 24, 2019

See https://bitbucket.org/osrf/gazebo/pull-requests/3101/use-dart-67-behavior-for-setting/diff#comment-99742882
@jslee02 jslee02 added the type: bug Indicates an unexpected problem or unintended behavior label Apr 24, 2019
@jslee02 jslee02 added this to the DART 6.8.2 milestone Apr 24, 2019
scpeters added a commit that referenced this issue Apr 24, 2019
@scpeters
BoxedLcpConstraintSolver: API compatible with 6.7
cf63f68 
Fixes #1288 by adding default values to solver arguments.
@scpeters scpeters mentioned this issue Apr 24, 2019
Merged
3 tasks
jslee02 pushed a commit that referenced this issue Apr 24, 2019
@scpeters @jslee02
BoxedLcpConstraintSolver: API compatible with 6.7 (#1291)
f041a97 
* BoxedLcpConstraintSolver: API compatible with 6.7

Fixes #1288 by adding default values to solver arguments.

* Update changelog
@jslee02
Copy link
Member Author

jslee02 commented Apr 24, 2019

Resolved by #1291

@jslee02 jslee02 closed this as completed Apr 24, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
type: bug Indicates an unexpected problem or unintended behavior
Projects
None yet
Milestone
DART 6.8.2
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@jslee02