{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ros-planning/navigation/issues/364","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ros-planning/navigation/issues/364/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ros-planning/navigation/issues/364/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ros-planning/navigation/issues/364/events","html_url":"https://github.com/ros-planning/navigation/pull/364","id":91654790,"number":364,"title":"Remove Footprint Layer (and organize footprint functions) ","user":{"login":"DLu","id":1016143,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/1016143?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/DLu","html_url":"https://github.com/DLu","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/DLu/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/DLu/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/DLu/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/DLu/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/DLu/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/DLu/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/DLu/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/DLu/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/DLu/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":1,"created_at":"2015-06-28T23:27:51Z","updated_at":"2015-06-29T00:15:20Z","closed_at":null,"pull_request":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ros-planning/navigation/pulls/364","html_url":"https://github.com/ros-planning/navigation/pull/364","diff_url":"https://github.com/ros-planning/navigation/pull/364.diff","patch_url":"https://github.com/ros-planning/navigation/pull/364.patch"},"body":"Rationale described here: #289\r\n\r\nMy apologies for the late inclusion for the jade release. \r\n\r\nThis PR does three key things: \r\n 1. Removes the independent footprint layer and integrates the functionality with the obstacle (and voxel) layer. \r\n 2. Moves the footprint-specific functions from costmap_2d_ros to footprint.cpp\r\n 3. Moves the footprint publisher to the costmap_2d_ros object\r\n\r\nOne consequence of (3) is that I simplified the parameters slightly for the footprints, in that I've eliminated the footprint_param parameter and instead just had the incoming parameter named \"footprint_spec\" and the published footprint called \"footprint\". \r\n\r\n\r\n"},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ros-planning/navigation/issues/comments/116362153","html_url":"https://github.com/ros-planning/navigation/pull/364#issuecomment-116362153","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/ros-planning/navigation/issues/364","id":116362153,"user":{"login":"mikeferguson","id":899410,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/899410?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/mikeferguson","html_url":"https://github.com/mikeferguson","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mikeferguson/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mikeferguson/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mikeferguson/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mikeferguson/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mikeferguson/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mikeferguson/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mikeferguson/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mikeferguson/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mikeferguson/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2015-06-29T00:15:20Z","updated_at":"2015-06-29T00:15:20Z","body":"Looking at this change, I also wonder if it makes sense to backport to Indigo (we would of course have to make the parameter changes backwards-compatible). Given the lack of documentation about the footprint layer it seems that fixing this in Indigo would also be beneficial. It would break ABI, but then again, the costmap mutex fixes that I recently did (which were very much needed) also broke ABI.\r\n\r\nOne other note is that much of the added code does not follow the ROS style guide. In particular, there are a number places where there are extra spaces inside paranthesis, there are a couple \"cuddled braces\", and indents are not always 2 spaces. I realize large portions of the navigation stack do not conform to the style guide, but it would generally be nice to move towards the style guide with each new PR."}}