Populate Transitions in Transition Events (continuation)#1269
Populate Transitions in Transition Events (continuation)#1269fujitatomoya merged 7 commits intoros2:rollingfrom
Conversation
Signed-off-by: SuperJappie08 <36795178+SuperJappie08@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: SuperJappie08 <36795178+SuperJappie08@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: SuperJappie08 <36795178+SuperJappie08@users.noreply.github.com>
|
Pulls: ros2/rcl_interfaces#185, #1269, ros2/rclcpp#2967, ros2/rclpy#1528 |
|
@fujitatomoya, this patch did not yet include compatibility with ros2/rcl_interfaces#185, but I have it (just not part of the PR yet) I will fix it now |
|
@fujitatomoya friendly ping, could you rerun the tests? |
|
Pulls: ros2/rcl_interfaces#185, #1269, ros2/rclcpp#2967, ros2/rclpy#1528 |
Signed-off-by: SuperJappie08 <36795178+SuperJappie08@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: SuperJappie08 <36795178+SuperJappie08@users.noreply.github.com>
|
@fujitatomoya, I added the explicit conversions, as required by CMake. Two things to note: rcl/rcl_lifecycle/CMakeLists.txt Line 29 in e70d040 Instead of adding the second conversion, it might make sense to update the |
|
@fujitatomoya, friendly ping! |
1 similar comment
|
@fujitatomoya, friendly ping! |
|
@SuperJappie08 thanks, i will allocate some time later. |
|
@fujitatomoya, friendly ping. |
|
@Mergifyio rebase |
❌ Pull request can't be updated with latest base branch changesDetailsThis pull request seems to come from a fork, and Mergify needs the author's permission to update its branch. |
Signed-off-by: CursedRock17 <mtglucas1@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: CursedRock17 <mtglucas1@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: CursedRock17 <mtglucas1@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: SuperJappie08 <36795178+SuperJappie08@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: SuperJappie08 <36795178+SuperJappie08@users.noreply.github.com>
Adds compatibility with ros2/rcl_interfaces#185 Signed-off-by: SuperJappie08 <36795178+SuperJappie08@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: SuperJappie08 <36795178+SuperJappie08@users.noreply.github.com>
4b988b7 to
db14479
Compare
Signed-off-by: SuperJappie08 <36795178+SuperJappie08@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: SuperJappie08 <36795178+SuperJappie08@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: SuperJappie08 <36795178+SuperJappie08@users.noreply.github.com>
|
Pulls: ros2/rcl_interfaces#185, #1269, ros2/rclcpp#2967, ros2/rclpy#1528, ros2/launch_ros#495 |
|
@fujitatomoya, they all passed (eventually with retries) For completeness: |
Signed-off-by: SuperJappie08 <36795178+SuperJappie08@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: SuperJappie08 <36795178+SuperJappie08@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: SuperJappie08 <36795178+SuperJappie08@users.noreply.github.com>
Add clock parameter to rcl_lifecycle_state_machine_init() call to match the updated API signature. The function now requires a rcl_clock_t pointer as the third parameter for timestamping lifecycle transition events. Changes: - Add rclpy::Clock member to LifecycleStateMachine class - Initialize clock with RCL_SYSTEM_TIME in constructor - Pass clock pointer to rcl_lifecycle_state_machine_init() - Properly destroy clock in cleanup method This fixes the build error introduced by ros2/rcl#1269.
Signed-off-by: SuperJappie08 <36795178+SuperJappie08@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Tomoya Fujita <Tomoya.Fujita@sony.com>
* Populate Transitions Signed-off-by: CursedRock17 <mtglucas1@gmail.com> * Suspending timestamp until I find an ansewr Signed-off-by: CursedRock17 <mtglucas1@gmail.com> * Adding timestamp Signed-off-by: CursedRock17 <mtglucas1@gmail.com> * Simplify lifecycle event publication arguments Signed-off-by: SuperJappie08 <36795178+SuperJappie08@users.noreply.github.com> * Add clock to rcl_lifecycle_com_interface Signed-off-by: SuperJappie08 <36795178+SuperJappie08@users.noreply.github.com> * Update lifecycle transition event to use builtin_interfaces/Time Adds compatibility with ros2/rcl_interfaces#185 Signed-off-by: SuperJappie08 <36795178+SuperJappie08@users.noreply.github.com> * Add explicit conversions Signed-off-by: SuperJappie08 <36795178+SuperJappie08@users.noreply.github.com> --------- Signed-off-by: CursedRock17 <mtglucas1@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: SuperJappie08 <36795178+SuperJappie08@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: CursedRock17 <mtglucas1@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Rushsahay <rushhaank.sahay@gmail.com>
A new package was added to `rcl_logging` called `rcl_logging_implementation`. It depends on `rcpputils`, which I wasn't able to get building. Therefore, we are skipping building that package using `COLCON_IGNORE`.https://github.com/ros2/rclc needs to be pinned to an older version until ros2/rcl#1269 is added in https://github.com/micro-ROS/rcl.This PR also fixes micro-ROS#251.
A new package was added to `rcl_logging` called `rcl_logging_implementation`. It depends on `rcpputils`, which I wasn't able to get building. Therefore, we are skipping building that package using `COLCON_IGNORE`. https://github.com/ros2/rclc needs to be pinned to an older version until ros2/rcl#1269 is added in https://github.com/micro-ROS/rcl. This PR also fixes micro-ROS#251.
Description
Original author: @CursedRock17
Original reviewers: @fujitatomoya @audrow @ivanpauno @wjwwood
Continuation of #1140.
Implemented most feedback.
Fixes #1019
Is this user-facing behavior change?
Yes, Lifecycle transition events are now filled.
This comes with a small change in function signatures to support timestamping.
Did you use Generative AI?
No.
Additional Information
I would also recommend merging ros2/rcl_interfaces#185 to limit the amount of breaking changes.
I noticed that the
node_handlefield ofrcl_lifecycle_com_interface_tis never filled or used as far as I can see.