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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Look into ROS integration #10

Closed
omc8db opened this issue Oct 31, 2016 · 2 comments
Closed

Look into ROS integration #10

omc8db opened this issue Oct 31, 2016 · 2 comments
Labels
potential enhancement A change that might make Autonomy better

Comments

@omc8db
Copy link
Contributor

omc8db commented Oct 31, 2016

No description provided.

@omc8db omc8db added the enhancement A change that will make Autonomy better label Oct 31, 2016
@omc8db omc8db mentioned this issue Apr 9, 2017
Closed
@omc8db
Copy link
Contributor Author

omc8db commented Sep 15, 2017 •
edited
Loading

Potential benefits

  • Simulation
  • Logging
  • Easier access to SLAM algorithms

Potential pitfalls

  • ROS is waaay more complicated than it needs to be
  • ROS is heavy. It chews resources and introduces lots of latency
  • ROS is a pain in the ass to get running on a Pi
  • ROS introduces a single point of failure
  • ROS distributes configuration across a bunch of different scripts, files and environment variables
  • ROS requires a CMake derived build system and lots of config files even if you just want to run Python scripts
  • ROS flowgraphs with lots of nodes don't launch in a deterministic order, sometimes completely fail to launch
  • ROS reinvents the filesystem, aliasing, service resolution, host resolution ...

@sdlouhy
Copy link
Contributor

sdlouhy commented Nov 29, 2017

here's a source for getting kinetic working on a pi. it can be upgraded to lunar, but i've only managed to get it to work with roscomm

@skeltonn skeltonn added potential enhancement A change that might make Autonomy better and removed enhancement A change that will make Autonomy better labels Aug 29, 2018
@sdlouhy sdlouhy closed this as completed Oct 27, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
potential enhancement A change that might make Autonomy better
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@skeltonn @omc8db @sdlouhy