Dr. Denis
> May I raise the question (has probably been discussed elsewhere, but I couldn't find a note in #940): Why do we subscribe to `~/robot_description`? Isn't the usual workflow that...
> so... should we change that? I'll adjust!
> So when using multiple controller managers, we remap the topic within the launch file like this? > > ``` > remappings=[ > ('/robot_description', '/custom_1/robot_description'), > ] > ``` >...
> pending a Gazebo fixup PR see ros-controls/gz_ros2_control#265
> > > pending a Gazebo fixup PR > > > > > > see [ros-controls/gz_ros2_control#265](https://github.com/ros-controls/gz_ros2_control/pull/265) > > Do we want to maintain gazebo_ros2_control until EOL of Gazebo Classic? (at...
@firesurfer In the meantime, you can check how different tests are written. The integration tests are in the [hardware_interface_testing](https://github.com/ros-controls/ros2_control/tree/master/hardware_interface_testing) package. I usually find a similar test, copy it, and then...
@tenfoldpaper maybe implementation of `gz_ros2_control` is interesting in this regard for you? Can you check it?
We should keep timeout at it was and just add new option here.
I don't get the issue here. It seems to me that he Hardware Interface is not accepting this combination which is poor implementation of HW interface. So I see here...
> is there a specific reason to have the same ordering of the interfaces as in the URDF?. Moreover, `std::map` doesn't ensure this order at all. Well anyway, if you...