Resource Retriever

Reviewer: Vijay

Instructions for doing a doc review

See DocReviewProcess for more instructions

  1. Does the documentation define the Users of your Package, i.e. for the expected usages of your Stack, which APIs will users engage with?
  2. Are all of these APIs documented?
  3. Do relevant usages have associated tutorials? (you can ignore this if a Stack-level tutorial covers the relevant usage), and are the indexed in the right places?
  4. If there are hardware dependencies of the Package, are these documented?
  5. Is it clear to an outside user what the roadmap is for the Package?
  6. Is it clear to an outside user what the stability is for the Package?
  7. Are concepts introduced by the Package well illustrated?
  8. Is the research related to the Package referenced properly? i.e. can users easily get to relevant papers?
  9. Are any mathematical formulas in the Package not covered by papers properly documented?

For each launch file in a Package

  1. Is it clear how to run that launch file?
  2. Does the launch file start up with no errors when run correctly?
  3. Do the Nodes in that launch file correctly use ROS_ERROR/ROS_WARN/ROS_INFO logging levels?

Concerns / issues


  • There's pretty much no documentation in the wiki page. The code API in doxygen seems reasonable, but the wiki page needs a LOT more work (since it's empty).

Vijay (Take 2)

  • Roadmap and stability not explicitly addressed, but I think this is ok
    • In the tutorial, you mention:
      "Here we'll show you how to retrieve a file from a URL into memory, which is currently the only supported method of retrieval." Maybe this should also go on the main package page

  • These comments above are definitely optional changes, so I fine calling this doc cleared "doc cleared"


Wiki: resource_retriever/Reviews/2009-10-02_Doc_Review (last edited 2009-10-06 16:39:24 by VijayPradeep)