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

Solved bug with incompatible QoS policies (second try) #278

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Dec 12, 2023

Conversation

tudoroancea
Copy link
Contributor

@tudoroancea tudoroancea commented Dec 12, 2023

Public-Facing Changes

Solved bug with incompatible QoS policies

Description

Fixes the following issue

@tudoroancea tudoroancea changed the title Debug incompatible QoS Solved bug with incompatible QoS policies (second try) Dec 12, 2023
@@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ static foxglove::Parameter fromRosParam(const rclcpp::Parameter& p) {
} else if (type == rclcpp::ParameterType::PARAMETER_BOOL_ARRAY) {
std::vector<foxglove::ParameterValue> paramVec;
for (const auto value : p.as_bool_array()) {
paramVec.push_back(value);
paramVec.push_back(foxglove::ParameterValue(value));
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This change was already commited in #277, can you remove it from this PR? Not sure why it isn't shown as conflicting.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I based this branch on the one I created from #277 (to be able to compile the code and test it on my mac), that's why the same commit appears

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ok, I see

@achim-k achim-k merged commit efa1f0e into foxglove:main Dec 12, 2023
11 checks passed
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.

2 participants