feat: initial ROS2 AsyncAPI contribution by SIEMENS AG#270
feat: initial ROS2 AsyncAPI contribution by SIEMENS AG#270asyncapi-bot merged 15 commits intoasyncapi:masterfrom
Conversation
…ort and is corporate internal legally cleared for OSS contribution.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Welcome to AsyncAPI. Thanks a lot for creating your first pull request. Please check out our contributors guide useful for opening a pull request.
Keep in mind there are also other channels you can use to interact with AsyncAPI community. For more details check out this issue.
fmvilas
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Left a round of review. Thanks for putting it together, Florian 🙏
Achllle
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
My 2c as a ROS dev: ROS 2 parameters are a must-have for this to represent a ROS 2 interface.
@Achllle while we think that could be really interesting to include the parameters, we don't think that it is a hard requirement to have them to be able to have the first version of the ROS2 bindings. |
|
Considering the ROS 2 version of this effort, node_idl / NoDL includes them in their spec, I would argue this is a must-have for a complete spec. It's fine by me if it happens in two phases, but the point of a spec is that it's complete. |
yes. I agree that parameters need to be added to the ros2 bindings. In our use cases, we did not use them so far. That is why they slipped our implementation. I would like to add them in a second step. From what I've gathered, parameters are interfaced through fixed services that all nodes have, unless pro-actively deactivated. What can be transported is also fixed in terms of data / message types. So like you put it, it might only be necessary to add to a node==application what parameters it has and probably not list all the additional We need to investigate this more. I still am having trouble how it embeds into an asyncAPI binding.. Is somebody in the ros-infrastructure team already familiar with asyncAPI @Achllle ? |
|
The best way to get involvement from the ROS community would be via a post in ROS discourse! |
https://discourse.ros.org/t/invitation-to-collaborate-on-asyncapi-specification-for-ros2/42915 @fmvilas if you have the time, it would be a pleasure to have you join such a meeting. |
1. Include in the server binding links and change to none instead of localhost. 2. Include the link to the non-negative less than 232. 3. Explain better the message binding with links. 4. Put at the end a whole example of a ROS application with its explanation.
Co-authored-by: Christophe Bedard <bedard.christophe@gmail.com>
|
@fmvilas there might be another repo waiting for this to become official.. 😇 |
|
haha! love the name 🌹 |
|
@fmvilas any update on the V3.1 minor release? 🙂 |
Release on me, my bad. I'll prepare needed things in a few days |
|
in case you missed asyncapi/spec-json-schemas#582 (comment) @amparo-siemens @gramss I'm available for onboarding call. Please reach out to me at lpgornicki@gmail.com to sync on the exact day and time. It's purely bindings maintainance onboarding but I'll also share overall info about how the AsyncAPI Initiative operates. |
Sorry, we missed it. We will reach you now 🙂 |
|
Hey folks, fyi we scheduled our Spec Triage meeting: asyncapi/spec#1131 (comment) First time in a very, very long time 😄 I think v3-trauma has passed 😄 |
|
/dnm |
|
/rtm |
|
next steps -> asyncapi/spec-json-schemas#588 |
Description
Maintaining will be done through @amparo-siemens and me.
Further maintainers and improvements suggested in #254 are highly welcome.
This binding is tested already in a few internal tools and generators as seen in this presentation: ROSCon DE
cc: @renzo-sie (thank you for the preparations!) and @fmvilas