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

Release & Pinocchio v2 #31

Closed
nim65s opened this issue Feb 12, 2019 · 21 comments
Closed

Release & Pinocchio v2 #31

nim65s opened this issue Feb 12, 2019 · 21 comments

Comments

@nim65s
Copy link
Contributor

nim65s commented Feb 12, 2019

Hi @andreadelprete

Following discussions in stack-of-tasks/pinocchio#645 I would like to know what is the current status of this package.
Is it ready for a new release, or are you still working on it ?
I can make the release if you want, adressing #20 in the same time.

And is the pinocchio_v2 branch ready ? If so I could also merge it for the release, and publish it to robotpkg at the same moment as every other of our projects that depend on hpp-fcl / pinocchio.

@andreadelprete
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi @nim65s , after a quick look at the (really) long discussion you had with the others, I wonder whether this really concerns me and TSID. TSID depends on pinocchio, but not on FCL because it doesn't use the collision checking features. So, should I be concerned with this discussion?

To answer your question I think TSID is ready for a new release, using the branch pinocchio_v2, which you can merge into master.

@andreadelprete
Copy link
Collaborator

Regarding the BSD license issue #20, TSID contains the software eiquadprog which is under GPL. This might be an issue, doesn't it?

@nim65s
Copy link
Contributor Author

nim65s commented Feb 12, 2019

Thanks for your answers. If the branch pinocchio_v2 is ready, this is all we need.

@nim65s nim65s mentioned this issue Feb 12, 2019
@olivier-stasse
Copy link
Member

@andreadelprete When the planning messed up (or when there is no planning) avoiding collision in the control is the nice feature...
Yes having eiquadprog inside TSID is an issue.

@jcarpent
Copy link
Collaborator

@olivier-stasse I will provide a solution for that as soon as possible to remove the strong dependency on EiquadProg.

@andreadelprete
Copy link
Collaborator

@andreadelprete When the planning messed up (or when there is no planning) avoiding collision in the control is the nice feature...

sure, eventually it would be nice to add collision avoidance in TSID. I only meant that currently it's not there, so TSID wouldn't be affected by any change in HPP-FCL.

@olivier-stasse
Copy link
Member

Regarding the compatibility with pinocchio-v2 I worked on a PR to update the library to pinocchio-v2.1.0.
I made a mistake and pushed directly on devel instead of my PR. Let me know if this is a problem, I will revert it if needed.

@andreadelprete
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi @olivier-stasse, as far as I know TSID is already compatible with Pinocchio-v2. At the very least the branch pinocchio-v2 is. Moreover, @nim65s should have merged that branch into master a few weeks ago, so even master should be aligned with pinocchio-v2 now.

@andreadelprete
Copy link
Collaborator

Actually after a quick look at the code it seems that it is devel to be aligned with pinocchio-v2. Master is still on pinocchio-v1.

@olivier-stasse
Copy link
Member

Hi @andreadelprete. I did some tests today and some stuff were not working. For instance there was a lot of se3 namespace instead of pinocchio.

@olivier-stasse
Copy link
Member

And i am talking about the devel branch. But maybe I missed something

@nim65s
Copy link
Contributor Author

nim65s commented Mar 3, 2019

#25 changed the namespace, but in master instead of devel.

I will handle that tomorrow, and make a release of TSID.

@olivier-stasse
Copy link
Member

Ok, sorry my bad. Looking at #25, it seems that the branch pinocchio_v2 doing the right fix was not merged into devel.

@olivier-stasse
Copy link
Member

olivier-stasse commented Mar 3, 2019

@nim65s
I'll try to compare with the branch pinocchio_v2

@nim65s
Copy link
Contributor Author

nim65s commented Mar 4, 2019

@olivier-stasse So do you want to handle the merge in #33 ?

@nim65s
Copy link
Contributor Author

nim65s commented Mar 4, 2019

Or should we just forget about either the pinocchio_v2 branch, or @olivier-stasse 's last commits to devel ?

@nim65s
Copy link
Contributor Author

nim65s commented Mar 4, 2019

Well… For me, pinocchio_v2 branch is building (and tests are passing) and not devel, so I think I will use this one for the release.

@nim65s
Copy link
Contributor Author

nim65s commented Mar 4, 2019

Everything now looks good to me. @andreadelprete @olivier-stasse can you just review this commit: dab03d3 ?

@nim65s
Copy link
Contributor Author

nim65s commented Mar 4, 2019

Github overrides the link… You will have to go there #33 and then click on Merge branch 'devel' into pinocchio_v2

@andreadelprete
Copy link
Collaborator

Everything now looks good to me. @andreadelprete @olivier-stasse can you just review this commit: dab03d3 ?

it looks good to me!

@olivier-stasse
Copy link
Member

Good to me too

@nim65s nim65s closed this as completed in 594241d Mar 6, 2019
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

No branches or pull requests

4 participants