Proposer: David Gossow
Present at review:
- List reviewers
Question / concerns / comments
Enter your thoughts on the API and any questions / concerns you have here. Please sign your name. Anything you want to address in the API review should be marked down here before the start of the meeting.
- Minor: KEEP_ALIVE values are different in messages (0 vs. 2) [DONE]
InteractiveMarkerControl still has a todo re: orientation [DONE]
InteractiveMarkerFeedback: Header must be first field [DONE]
InteractiveMarker: "If this is set to 0," -> "If the timestamp is set to 0" [DONE]
InteractiveMarkerUpdate: byte -> uint8 [DONE]
dgossow: new proposed Menu message organization [DONE]
uint32 id # 0 is root uint32 parent_id # menu / entry title string title # command to be executed / transmitted back string command # What kind of command does this menu entry contain? # Default: do nothing, only send back feedback message string command_type
Proposed changes to command_type:
# send menu entry ID as feedback uint8 FEEDBACK=0 uint8 ROSRUN=1 uint8 ROSLAUNCH=2 uint8 command_type
InteractiveMarkerUpdate: replace INIT protocol with a separate latched topic that contains the global state. client is responsible for achieving sync. Pros: works with rosbag, gets rid of funkiness with subscriber callback consistency. Cons: does not allow two servers within the same roscpp process.
To be filled out by proposer based on comments gathered during API review period
Stack status change mark change manifest)
Action items that need to be taken.
Major issues that need to be resolved