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

[rviz_common] port basic plugins from "temp" location #50

Closed
wjwwood opened this issue Sep 27, 2017 · 3 comments
Closed

[rviz_common] port basic plugins from "temp" location #50

wjwwood opened this issue Sep 27, 2017 · 3 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@wjwwood
Copy link
Member

wjwwood commented Sep 27, 2017

For the demo I minimally ported the movement tool, one view controller (orbit), and a handful of display types to this "temp" folder in rviz_common:

https://github.com/ros2/rviz/tree/ca8f42e43ba9eaa6e15434b47906d7580da1c14a/rviz_common/src/rviz_common/temp/default_plugins

These were copied from rviz/src/rviz/default_plugin. So they should be deleted and the actual port should be made where we move the files in rviz/src/rviz/default_plugin to somewhere in the new rviz_default_plugins package and properly ported/updated. These files in the "temp" folder may serve as an example of how to solve some problems.

Once ported these plugins need to be in a shared library and need to be loaded via pluginlib, so this depends on #49.

The end goal of this would be to have a MVP application which improves on the current state by:

  • loading from pluginlib mechanism and
  • properly porting plugins to rviz_default_plugins
@wjwwood
Copy link
Member Author

wjwwood commented Dec 5, 2017

Several have been ported, but the tf and robot_model plugins still need to be moved out of "temp" in the rviz_common package and into the rviz_default_plugins package. The point cloud display also needs to be ported to rviz_default_plugins but it's not in the "temp" folder.

@wjwwood
Copy link
Member Author

wjwwood commented Dec 5, 2017

The porting thus far has been in #123.

@wjwwood
Copy link
Member Author

wjwwood commented Feb 22, 2018

I'm going to close this in favor of #101 which is more specific (and to simply waffle.io's behavior when linking the pr to the issue).

@wjwwood wjwwood closed this as completed Feb 22, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant