Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

wip - added yumi packages from orebro university #66

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: kinetic-devel
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

tstoyanov
Copy link

Starting the process of integrating yumi support. No changes to the original packages in this PR.

@gavanderhoorn
Copy link
Member

Thanks for the PR! From a quick look I think we'd need to separate out the Gazebo related things (like we did with the irb120 gazebo pkg) and some other minor things but it's a good start.

I'll see if I have some time soon for that.

PS: I notice that you opened the PR from your kinetic-devel branch: I'm fine with that, but any commits I push will end up on that then, which might not be too convenient. Would you perhaps want to open a new PR from a different branch?

@tstoyanov
Copy link
Author

Thanks for the help!
No problem with commits to my fork, I keep this repo dedicated for the purpose of integrating the yumi package, so any amount of mess there will not be an issue.

@gavanderhoorn
Copy link
Member

@jontje: 🛎.

@gavanderhoorn gavanderhoorn changed the title added yumi packages from orebro university wip - added yumi packages from orebro university May 26, 2017
@gavanderhoorn gavanderhoorn self-assigned this May 26, 2017
@Rahtron3030
Copy link

Thanks for making this available. Am I right in assuming this works in conjunction with the abb_driver and RAPID files from the non-experimental ABB package?

@gavanderhoorn
Copy link
Member

I cannot guarantee that. The files provided by @tstoyanov were specifically created to work with their setup (which is a modified version of abb_driver and ros_control). You might be able to get the base urdf to work, but I cannot guarantee it.

The plan is to refactor the xacros in this PR such that they would follow ROS-I conventions for file & directory layout, naming of files and of xacro internals. That has not happened yet.

@Sinchiguano

This comment has been minimized.

@gavanderhoorn

This comment has been minimized.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants