Next Client Library WG Meeting: Friday 22nd November 2024

Hi,
The next meeting of the Client Library Working Group will be this Friday, 22nd November 2024 at 8 AM Pacific Time.

The agenda for now includes:

Everyone is welcome to join.
If you have topics you want to discuss, feel free to anticipate them here in this thread.

2 Likes

@alsora can you check the calendar invite ? It shows an error for me.

I hate google calendar…
Sorry about that, this is new the link: https://calendar.app.google/Jz4q8HR8i1upWH9q7

I updated the main post

It might be simpler to invite the Google group to the calendar event instead of creating a calendar event (link) and emailing it to the Google group.

1 Like

Thanks for the suggestion, I’ll give it a try.

This is a short summary of what we discussed today:

  • We need to add an API to extract timers (and maybe other ROS 2 entities) from a Waitable, to allow the Events Executor to correctly register its callbacks.
    • We noted that currently all executors assume that Waitables entities are “fixed” although the API nor the docs mention it. We should add a disclaimer in the docs and be clear that a “dynamic” waitable is not supported.
  • A long discussion around improvements of ROS IDL. One of the main use-cases is the ability to define parameters that contain array of types, for example currently you can’t easily have an array of poses as a parameter and you need to either have a flat representation or give a different name to each pose (parameters prefix) and then rework them in C++.
    • There are several issues related to this, for example the possibility of nested and recursive types in ROS IDL.
    • Recursion is problematic as some applications need to pre-allocate message buffers or may want to bound them to achieve zero-copy shared memory. Recursion would make these use-cases more difficult, but definitely not impossible.
    • Parameters values could be “binary blobs” that get de-serialized using the standard ROSIDL tools on the receiving side.
    • A problem here is that the serialization protocol depends on the RMW selected, so things like replaying a bag may not work if you move between RMWs with different serialization protocols.
    • We don’t want to introduce yet another serialization protocol, because this would become a dependency of everything in ROS.
    • We could use a YAML or JSON string that gets parsed.
2 Likes

Good notes, and I just wonder if the google docs ROS 2 Client Libraries Working Group - Google Docs will not be updated, the latest notes of meeting is of 2024-05-03 (UTC)

EDIT: I think meeting notes should be in a central place, which is good for observers like me.

Yes, you are right!

I’m in the process of making the working group “official” under the new ROS governance (OSRA and PMC).
Among the necessary work, I’ll definitely make sure to use a dedicated and common place for the meeting notes.