Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 40 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.Sign up
Possible build errors due to new xacro processing #120
I submitted #117, which built successfully, then updated to use the new
In comparing to other
That PR has had four build checks on Travis so far:
Looking at the documentation, I see:
The docs suggest generating an
In the end, it likely doesn't matter... if this is the new standard, I can update the ~10
If you use the
The other support packages you found don't use Jade+ xacro constructs (with the exception of a few), so
I'll preface this with admitting noob status... This was to raise the issue of an unexpected build failure that might be best to fix proactively vs. reactively. In my hunting, I didn't find a mention of
As another data point, after learning of
So... output of this (which I'm happy to do) could be various, but I brought it to ask the experts. To suggest two ideas:
I like fixing for the future. Someone else will come along to help, have a build fail, and spend an hour like me trying to figure out why. If the solution is known and could be added in places they will stumble on, why not do it?
Preface repeated: I'm a noob so if everyone already knows that
Thanks for the dialog. I'm still puzzled by
Going by your input that
I'll close this, and appreciate the feedback!
I have a feeling you're making this a much bigger "problem" than it really is.
"in order processing" is completely orthogonal to all the other nice features that
As people wanted to use those features in their xacros on ROS Indigo as well, the
That's when someone figured out that they could use the
So the idea was to enable all the other new features in
If you don't add
That is all there is to it really.
Very possibly. That said, ROS is pretty complex and I've struggled with the documentation numerous times in my learning journey. I saw nothing on the xacro page (which is where people will mostly go to look for help on xacro) containing the excellent insights you've provided above. With some minor doc tweaks, there's the potential to spare contributors frustration and confusion. I think that's worth it.
Thank you for that. I just changed to specify Indigo.
I'm still unsure why #118 didn't fail the build.
Done, and thanks for the guidance!