ROS Resources: Documentation | Support | Discussion Forum | Service Status | Q&A answers.ros.org

ROS2 Navigation Working Group Kick-off


#1

All,
If you’re interested in our ROS2 Navigation plans and status, we’re going to start a regular working group to discuss.

Our first WG will be this Thursday, 8/2/18, at 8am Pacific time. If you are interested in joining, message me with your email and I’ll send you an invite.

Thanks,
Matt


Introducing the ROS 2 Technical Steering Committee
#2

Update - due to a conflict, I have to move this meeting to 7am Pacific time, still on Thursday 8/2. If you’re interested, message me with your email address.

Matt


#3

Will you guys publish your meeting minutes each time after the meeting ? It benefits the community to get aware of what’s going on, thanks !


#4

Thanks to everyone who attended the first WG, overall it was a success. There is obviously a lot of work to be done, and we’ll meet again in a few weeks.

If you replied to me and didn’t get an invite, I apologize, I didn’t see some replies until after the meeting. Next time I’ll try to create an event with a link that is public so anyone can join.

The presentation slides - Navigation 2 Overview, are being pushed to our Github repo: https://github.com/ros-planning/navigation2/blob/master/doc/README.md

Feel free to file issues there for anything you want addressed.

Thanks again,
Matt


#5

All, here were the notes captured from the first meeting (thanks to @mjeronimo):
Next time I’ll try to be more organized. :slight_smile:

  • Michael Ferguson
    • Comment: Task dispatch engine: make this a separate library?
      • Possibly, if it makes sense. Our first release will probably have it integrated
  • Should implement continuous re-planning in the navigation node
  • ROS2: compress these modules into same process?
  • Warning: Environmental model across many processes could be performance issue
    • Huge state machine graphs floating around
      • Could we solve with local caching?
    • Questions
      • Porting A* and DWA or re-implementing?
        • Mostly porting, with some refactoring
      • Add some unit tests?
        • Yes, we plan to have unit tests, integration tests and system tests
      • Working on a branch, review upon integration into master?
        • Yes we will integrate into master, branch is for temporary / work in progress code
      • Timeline?
        • December 14th (Dirk mentioned Crystal release)
      • Fully working system?
        • At least basic move to pose functionality, with collaterals
      • Default platform?
        • Turtlebot3
  • David Lu
    • Sharing of resources - reason for putting everything in one process, one node for move base
    • Have to pass entire cost map - could be performance limiter
    • Part of the reason to combine it was performance-related
    • Overall trade-off between ability control things vs. ability to be modular
    • Would we be better off (nav core) not having the cost map object not managed at the high level
    • Planner tracking its own cost map
    • What you lose is ability to call specific recoveries
    • 3D version of DWA
  • Adam Duncan (Amazon)
    • Anything in ROS2 design; fundamentally aren’t achievable in ROS2?
      • Answer - no, we believe this all is possible when Actions are implemented
  • Any core components missing on ROS2
    • Tf2 message filter
    • Actions
  • Ray Cole (Amazon, lead engineer on internal team, ROS)
    • Performance: areas to try to test? Use cases, data flow.
    • Something to do early on
    • Introspection into what’s going on? Management console.
    • Errors, invalid states
    • Productized
  • Tom Moore
    • No comments
  • Wei Zhi Liu
    • No comments
  • Dirk Thomas
    • Overhead between processes
      • Could put upper cap on cross-language capability
      • Could incur high run-time cost
      • Could stay within same language, build into shared libraries
  • Shivang Tripathi
    • No comments
  • Steve
    • No comments
  • Doug (Amazon)
    • No comments