-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12
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
Extended sender: simulated data #6
Extended sender: simulated data #6
Conversation
Hi @cacioppoc @zac-dydek is creating a PR the best way to contribute to this repo or is there another preferred method ? Thanks a lot, have a great week! |
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.
These are great additions, just one small change to make the operational state choices match the standard document.
MassRobotics-AMR-Sender/client.py
Outdated
|
||
async def sendMessage(): | ||
uri = "ws://localhost:3000" | ||
OPERATIONAL_STATES = ["navigating", "idle", "disabled", "offline", "charging", "waiting", "loadingUnloading", "manualOveride"] |
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.
The operational states in our working document are similar, but not identical. We split "waiting" into:
- Waiting for human event (which probably covers your "loadingUnloading" state?)
- Waiting for external event
- Waiting for internal event
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.
Hi @zac-dydek I copied these values from /AMR_Interop_Standard.json
, which seems to don't exactly follow what's in the doc. I can piggyback that change into this PR. What do you think would be good names ?
waitingHumanEvent
waitingExternalEvent
waitingInternalEvent
??
Thanks!
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.
I see, yes, it seems the .json file is slightly out-of-date. Yes, let's make that change while we're at it. The names you picked are fine with me!
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.
Thanks @zac-dydek I made the changes, could you review ?
Thanks!
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.
Looks great, thanks!
Hey, this standard is a great initiative. We are exploring it at InOrbit since it seems like a really nice way to get data from different robots into our platform. As part of this exploration we extended the sender to be able to generate more complete status reports with changing data.
Besides this, the PR includes a couple of fixes/improvements that we believe are useful:
datetime
timezone
Thanks !