-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.8k
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
Change_map service to map_server [Rebase/Noetic] #1029
Conversation
map_server/CMakeLists.txt
Outdated
@@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ project(map_server) | |||
find_package(catkin REQUIRED | |||
COMPONENTS | |||
roscpp | |||
roslib |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
this seems to only be in the Cmake/package.xml - where is it actually used/required?
Any progress updates on this? |
@ros-pull-request-builder retest this please |
@DLu thanks for seeing if the tests pass. Does it look good to merge? |
I think so. Let's get the +1 from @mikeferguson first since he had formally reviewed it earlier. |
Any progress on this? |
Any chance this will be merged within the next month? |
Added MapServer::loadMapFromYaml() MapServer::loadMapFromParams() MapServer::loadMapFromValues()
of causing the map_server_node to exit Changed methods MapServer::loadMapFromValues() MapServer::loadMapFromParams() MapServer::loadMapFromYaml()
Added second test map and test constants Added rostest for change_map service
* Refactored map loading from constructor to three methods * Added change_map service using LoadMap.srv
Hi @DLu I saw that there's an addition feature (change_map) to the map_server. Is this add-on feature available if install via apt? Best, |
* Refactored map loading from constructor to three methods * Added change_map service using LoadMap.srv
No, and its been over a year since the last release, so its overdue. |
This is a redo of #461 for noetic, integrating changes that have been made in the last 4 years since the original PR. 🙄
The CI will fail until the changes from ros/common_msgs#152 are released, see ros/common_msgs#167
The return codes from the service are not ideal (in that it only returns success or failure, not the more nuanced failure codes described in the service) but I was trying to keep close to @sloretz's original PR structure.