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

Update URDF Robot version tag to 'tesseract_version' for ROS2 compatibilty #979

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jan 16, 2024

Conversation

marrts
Copy link
Contributor

@marrts marrts commented Jan 12, 2024

Recommended change per #937.

This will throw an error if you set the robot version greater than 1 (mimicking ROS2's behavior) and prompt the user to change to tesseract_version.

@marrts marrts force-pushed the fix/version-tag-name branch from 1d0931e to 88b6cf8 Compare January 12, 2024 22:13
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 12, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (4c930c5) 90.93% compared to head (31ae7bc) 90.91%.
Report is 2 commits behind head on master.

❗ Current head 31ae7bc differs from pull request most recent head 737db49. Consider uploading reports for the commit 737db49 to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #979      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   90.93%   90.91%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         280      280              
  Lines       15847    15855       +8     
==========================================
+ Hits        14411    14414       +3     
- Misses       1436     1441       +5     

see 2 files with indirect coverage changes

@Levi-Armstrong
Copy link
Contributor

I think we need to keep version because it is part of the urdf schema, but adding the additional attribute makes sense to not cause conflicts.

@marrts
Copy link
Contributor Author

marrts commented Jan 15, 2024

I change

I think we need to keep version because it is part of the urdf schema, but adding the additional attribute makes sense to not cause conflicts.

I changed the wording a little bit.

@marrts marrts requested a review from Levi-Armstrong January 15, 2024 17:43
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.

2 participants