Attendees
- Nathan Brooks
- Michael Görner
- Felix von Drigalski
- Michael Ferguson
- Robert Haschke
- Mark Moll
- Tyler Weaver
- Henning Kayser
- Andy Zelenak
- Jere Liukkonen
- Jafar Abdi
- Marq Rasmussen
- Dave Coleman
Agenda
- Scene graph support (Felix)
- Reducing compile time (Jafar)
- When should we branch for Noetic? (Dave)
- MoveIt2 Development update (Henning)
- Google Summer of Code update (Mark)
- Dropping Kinetic support (Michael)
- Clarify 3D object import button in Rviz (Felix)
Discussion Notes
- Scene graph support (Felix)
- Felix: we can skip this topic, nothing to report
- Reducing compile time (Jafar)
- Switch to one shared library for all of moveit_core
- Reduced compile time from 75 to 45 seconds
- Robert: doing this isn’t reasonable
- Should we use custom caches with build farm?
- QT dependency large, can we pre-compile headers
- Robert: there are less timeouts on build farm now, maybe not urgent
- Summary: Jafar’s findings so far are not actionable due to drawbacks
- Next: Jafar will look further into pre-compiled binaries
- Switch to one shared library for all of moveit_core
- When should we branch for Noetic? (Dave)
- Robert: Do it right before we have release process started
- Michael / Ferguson: lets just release off of master for first 6 months while Noetic settles down
- Robert: don’t have noetic-devel branch until December
- Dave: do we need a noetic branch since there won’t be another ROS 1 version after Noetic?
- Fergs: ROS 2 is not as easy as advertised. Major missing portions still (see his blog)
- Andy: ros_control is not ported (Fergs: 6 mo still)
- Nathan: we used MoveIt 2 for a client already
- Summary: we won’t make noetic branches for at least 6 months
- MoveIt2 Development update (Henning)
- Preparing Foxy support, aiming for start of July
- There is a compiling branch for Foxy, will have diff branch for Eloquent
- Still working on straight migration
- move_group almost done
- motion planning plugin not done
- warehouse remaining
- moveit2 project spreadsheet shows what remains: we should be done end of July
- need an eloquent branch because launch files changed
- Fergs: eloquent support will be dropped soon, don’t bother with it
- Dave: can we just drop eloquent support?
- Tyler: there’s no foxy support in debian, but yes by source
- Michael: we agreed not to support old ROS 2 versions
- Fergs: rolling release is coming (Rolling)
- Trajectory execution available in ros2 control
- Summary: will ditch Eloquent branch and focus on Foxy
- Dropping Kinetic support in master branch (Michael)
- Mark: Kinetic is still widely used per the stats
- Michael: its really hard to upgrade robots, reality is kinetic is important
- Would need to update source install instructions to support QHull
- Michael: we could pin the last known working version of master branch for kinetic
- Mark: porting major features back isn’t going to happen anymore
- Dave: having great new features in a newer release encourages people to upgrade
- Robert: let’s drop support out of box but provide advanced qhull source instructions
- Dave: will we turn off build farm testing for kinetic?
- Robert: yes
- Summary: we are dropping support for Kinetic in the master branch, only supporting melodic and noetic
- Google Summer of Code update (Mark)
- Jeroen student is working on OMPL constraint planning in MoveIt
- Work is in this repo
- Tyler: intern Adam is doing well working on jog_arm, addressed issues in moveit 1 first
- Working on port for moveit 2
- ros_control2 will be a future issue
- Andy: renaming jog_arm to moveit_servo in ROS 1 and ROS 2
- Jeroen student is working on OMPL constraint planning in MoveIt
- World MoveIt Day (Mark)
- Still compiling statistics
- Didn’t break any records but it was comparable to previous year attendance
-
Clarify 3D object import button in Rviz (Felix)
- Looking for feedback on this UI change
- MoveIt 2 Weekly Standup (Dave)
- There is a separate more technical meeting happening if you want to get involved in hands on moveit 2 development. Contact henning@picknik.ai to get the calendar invite
- New PR for supporting multiple planners in move_group via moveit_cpp (Henning)
- Currently moveit_cpp supports multiple planning pipelines
- Question: do we want to represent the planing pipeline with the planning_id? Or have separate field in the motion planning request message for the pipeline?
- Henning prefers second option
- Michael: do we want to allow setting a planning ID on the parameter server?
- Feedback encouraged
- Summary: Enforce no slashes in the planner manager ID and use separate fields for the two concepts