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.

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

Robustify OSR launch script, and make rover full stop the wheels when idle #122

Closed
wants to merge 4 commits into from

Conversation

apollokit
Copy link
Collaborator

@apollokit apollokit commented Dec 3, 2020

  • made the launch script more robust
    • using symbolic links now so that updates get captured in the systemd service
    • allow usage of custom osr_mod.launch file if you want to disclude e.g. the led screen node
  • made the rover truly idle when it's supposed to be idle
    • now we command the wheels to fully stop when a command hasn't been received for a little bit. This consumes less current, and avoids the chattering noise that was present when idle before.

… idle. Now also sending a full stop command after a little bit so that we can minimize idle power consumption
…for running on your system. Will default to the original file if that's not found
…nch script now, so it's robust to updates; allow user to make a custom osr_mod.launch file now (example usage: when you don't have the led screen); make the launch script name lowercase
@Achllle
Copy link
Collaborator

Achllle commented Dec 7, 2020

Haven't looked at this properly but one quick comment: these two changes are sufficiently independent to warrant 2 PRs. That's good practice and helps with debugging, and in cases when changes need to be reverted.

@apollokit
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Haven't looked at this properly but one quick comment: these two changes are sufficiently independent to warrant 2 PRs. That's good practice and helps with debugging, and in cases when changes need to be reverted.

Yeah, I thought about that. Seems like more effort than it's worth though. The changes are well divided by the commits, and the commits are working code, so reverting changes for debugging is not a concern IMO.

Shrug. Could do it if you feel strongly about it.

@Achllle
Copy link
Collaborator

Achllle commented Dec 8, 2020

For a small PR it's not a big deal, but I always see people stretch the limits of what should be one PR. I think as a maintainer we should (try to) set the example.
One other advantage: it makes PRs go in MUCH faster, especially since one small change is not holding back another unrelated change that could help someone already if released.
If you don't mind ;)

@apollokit
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Per discussion, separated this pull request out into two, see the links above

@apollokit apollokit closed this Dec 9, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants