Russ Tedrake

See Remark 5.1 in Tobia's thesis.

I believe this is resolved by #21403. @bernhardpg -- please re-open if I'm wrong.

I believe this is resolved by #21402. @bernhardpg -- please reopen if I'm wrong.

In my view, the important encapsulation here is the one provided by the GCS class itself: we want people to be working at the level of costs and constraints on...

My response was completely supportive of adding the extra methods. I agree that we need them.

@wrangelvid , @sadraddini -- it seems like perhaps this issue can now be closed? are there still missing getters?

Related to #20975.

@ggould-tri wrote > Is the proposal also to change joint position ports to be in motor shaft radians rather than joint radians? For joint velocity ports to be in motor...

Since it seems there is significant support for keeping the "actuation input is joint torques", then I'm now slightly more in favor of documenting and _only_ supporting that workflow, rather...

@amcastro-tri -- ping on this.