Convert launch files to new style #262
Conversation
| launch.actions.ExecuteProcess( | ||
| cmd=[ | ||
| ExecutableInPackage(package='robot_state_publisher', executable_name='robot_state_publisher'), | ||
| os.path.join( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you put a TODO comment here to use a substitution to find this file rather than using ament_index_python directly. I haven't implemented the substitution yet, but it is planned.
| def generate_launch_description(): | ||
| return LaunchDescription([ | ||
| launch.actions.ExecuteProcess( | ||
| cmd=[ExecutableInPackage(package='dummy_map_server', executable_name='dummy_map_server')], |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If these are ROS nodes (I think they are) then you should use launch_ros.actions.Node instead.
| def generate_launch_description(): | ||
| return LaunchDescription([ | ||
| launch.actions.ExecuteProcess( | ||
| cmd=[ExecutableInPackage(package='lifecycle', executable='lifecycle_talker')], |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think you can/should use the launch_ros.actions.LifecycleNode action for the lifecycle_talker and lifecycle_listener instead and the launch_ros.actions.Node for the lifecycle_service_client.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can launch_ros.actions.LifecycleNode be used on regular rclcpp Nodes ?
If it doesn't make sense to do so, we should likely not use it for the listener as it is a "regular node" AFAICT:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If it is not an actual lifecycle node then it will work, but it will have unnecessary overhead and if someone attempts to make launch change its state that will fail).
So I'd say you're right we should use Node on the confusingly name :p lifecycle_listener.
kev-the-dev
force-pushed
the
fix-legacy-launch
branch
2 times, most recently
from
60f2f80
to
deef9fc
Compare
|
Addressed comments (that's a lot cleaner!). Feel free to wait until after bouncy release as this is low priority |
| # limitations under the License. | ||
|
|
||
| from launch import LaunchDescription | ||
| from launch_ros.actions import Node, LifecycleNode |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nit: I don't know if these files are linted automatically but we usually import in alphabetical order
There was a problem hiding this comment.
And one import per line. So this should be split into two lines.
in dummy_robot_bringup and lifecycle
kev-the-dev
force-pushed
the
fix-legacy-launch
branch
from
deef9fc
to
adcf3a7
Compare
|
Once this is merged, the dummy-robot-demo wiki page will need to be updated to refer to the new filename. The lifecycle launch is not currently referenced in the lifecycle wiki page, but probably should be. |
|
Let's merge this and @ironmig can you deploy the wiki changes and then link them here? I'll test them on linux, macOS, and Windows (at least from source and x86). |
|
I think there was a reason for not mentioning the launchfiles in the wiki page. I think they were even considered for removal after the ardent release. |
|
I checked out the wiki changes, and they work on my machine(s), thanks! |
|
Follow-up PR at #277 |
|
What about the https://github.com/ros2/launch/blob/master/launch_ros/examples/lifecycle_pub_sub_launch.py I noticed that it is written in old style, but the wiki cites it as a valid example: I'm trying to understand how to modify it, but without success |
|
Would you be able to rephrase your question? I'm not sure that I've understood it. The launch file you referenced is using the new-style launch, not the legacy launch. |
|
If I try to adapt it to my lifecycle node I get an error about |
|
it's likely you're using an older version of launch (Ardent, perhaps) that doesn't include the new-style launch (it was released in Bouncy). If that's not the case, please ask a question on answers.ros.org and we can troubleshoot there rather than on this PR |
|
I'm using the launch file available in the master branch and it is exactly the same as the file that I linked here |
|
@Myzhar please ask your question on ROS answers using the "ros2" tag and providing a description containing:
Commenting on a closed PR with little context makes it hard for the community to see your question and help you solve your issue. Thanks! |
in dummy_robot_bringup and lifecycle (addreses #249)