Skip to content

Conversation

@kev-the-dev
Copy link
Contributor

See this comment. The design doc for remapping left the order of __node and __ns ambiguous, but RCL applied them in a specific order.

- A node has name `talker`
- A user remaps the node name to foo `talker:__node:=foo`
- A user remaps the original node's namespace `talker:__ns:=/my_namespace`
- The namespace is NOT changed because node name remaps are applied BEFORE namespace remaps
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I recommend phrasing to say what happens rather than what doesn't happen: The final namespace is /ns because the node name was remapped before the namespace


- A node has name `talker`
- A user remaps the node name to foo `talker:__node:=foo`
- A user remaps the original node's namespace `talker:__ns:=/my_namespace`
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The example should show that __node happens first even if the rule is given second. How about combining the two bullets to show the order?

a user gives the rules `talker:__ns:=/my_namespace' then `__node:=foo`.

@sloretz sloretz added the in progress Actively being worked on (Kanban column) label Jul 19, 2018
@sloretz sloretz added in review Waiting for review (Kanban column) and removed in progress Actively being worked on (Kanban column) labels Jul 26, 2018
@sloretz sloretz self-requested a review July 26, 2018 18:06
@kev-the-dev kev-the-dev merged commit acf3fa6 into ros2:gh-pages Jul 27, 2018
@kev-the-dev kev-the-dev removed the in review Waiting for review (Kanban column) label Jul 27, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants