fix default servoj_lookahead_time

[v4hn]

I know @gavanderhoorn claims this repository is obsolete for political reasons, but I believe this two-byte change should still be merged. :)

The documented range (https://www.universal-robots.com/download/) of this parameter for the servoj command is [0.03;0.2], so the default 1.0 is an extreme value way out of the actual range.

For us, running on a UR5 CB, this lead to eef errors of +-.5cm in the final goal location.
Reducing the value to the rough center of the range produces much more reasonable results below 1mm eef error.

[gavanderhoorn]

I know @gavanderhoorn claims

That makes it sound like I'm making something up or I'm doing this for my own gain or amusement.

That's not the case at all.

this repository is obsolete for political reasons,

That's not true either.

This repository is deprecated, not obsolete. For technical reasons, it's better for users to consider using ur_robot_driver instead of this driver.

For some users however (notable: those with CB1 and CB2 controllers), this driver could still be useful.

But, as it's deprecated, it won't see any new development. It's essentially in maintenance mode.

but I believe this two-byte change should still be merged. :)

The documented range (https://www.universal-robots.com/download/) of this parameter for the servoj command is [0.03;0.2], so the default 1.0 is an extreme value way out of the actual range.

For us, running on a UR5 CB, this lead to eef errors of +-.5cm in the final goal location.
Reducing the value to the rough center of the range produces much more reasonable results below 1mm eef error.

The v1.8 scripting manual (which is the last version CB2 supports) does not mention this parameter.

Are you using ur_modern_driver with a CB3 controller?

[v4hn]

That makes it sound like I'm making something up or I'm doing this for my own gain or amusement.

I wouldn't say that, and it was not meant that way.

This repository is deprecated, not obsolete.

Sorry for the wrong choice of words if you think so.
As you deliberately did not merge #334 , it is obsolete w.r.t. newer firmware versions though.

it's better for users to consider using ur_robot_driver instead of this driver.

consider is not use, and as always you are very careful about your wording.
Add speedj support and a low_latency controller mode to ur_robot_driver and I'm happy to look into it, until then I do not consider it the technically "better" solution in many situations.

Are you using ur_modern_driver with a CB3 controller?

For some of our existing setups we do this, yes.
For a number of reasons, not last the effort of migration and careful setup tuning.
And now I wonder whether that is enough of a reason for you to tell me you will not merge a parameter change that moves a default parameter value into its officially-defined range.