We don’t have an agenda big enough to justify a meeting this month. Since we don’t have much develop and that we shall focus more on some development, the meetings are going to be bimonthly instead of monthly. This will last until we have more content to cover.
Also, here is the link to the last meeting that we had, unfortunately there was a problem with the audio and @arjo129 voice cannot be heard, but for the next one we have people that volunteered to help in recording and also with the minutes, so I think we wont have more problems.
This is too bad. As being very much involved in Control WG, I would recommend to keep regular meetings even there is no much content in terms of presentations. For example, we never had any presentations, we are focused on the issues and PR we are currently working on and try to discuss them with the broader group.
It could be still very valuable to have exchange of ideas on certain topics related to maritime. Possibly, there could be a focused topic each time in the form of an open discussion. Of course, this depends on how do you image WG to be organized.
I agree just to be clear a monthly meeting is very high cadence. I agree with @destogl on issues and PRs. In the previous recording we had some problems with my voice and I voiced my concerns. I do not agree we have no work…
Also this month in Gazebo’s push towards better maritime support, we have added the following:
My main focus for this month however will be a simple GPU-accelerated implementation of the bottom tracking DVL sensor in Gazebo.
To streamline things I have created a Kanban board to manage all maritime things so we can better focus our future meetings: Are We Maritime Yet · GitHub
I think we should gun for a meeting date in June @matosinho
I agree with @destogl that informal discussions are important to keep the momentum. This WG has not had any technical discussions at the meetings, and that’s important for the early stages of a WG to set a focus and to set up the infrastructure. The project board @arjo129 set up looks great! It would be great to have broad community discussions about the board, the process, and how to move on in the technical aspect. If @Matosinho is not available or finds it a strain on time, I think it’s fair for the community to share the hosting of the WG, and have alternate people host it, so that people who want to meet can meet.
Just my two cents from a community standpoint. I’m not even a “formal” member of the group I just stalk.
Oh yeah, I heard there was also some sdformat updates that @chapulina wanted to get the community’s feedback on at the next meeting. Not sure if that’s on OP’s radar.
That’s right! We’re planning to provide native support for added mass to Gazebo. We’ll write an SDF proposal and bring it to the working group for feedback before we jump into the implementation. I don’t think we’ll have the proposal ready for the June meeting though.
For those interested, here’s the issue tracking this effort:
I’ll link to this on the project board for further discussion.
Is there a date in mind for a June WG meeting? I’ve seen other WGs post discourse threads in the format " WG Meeting - ", usually a week or so in advance. There is usually discussion in that thread or a linked GDoc on topic requests. I’m not sure if we’ve decided on a process yet or if I have missed documentation of said process - can anyone clarify?