[ros2-master] Fix build for last nav2 main branch

[doisyg]

Fix build for last nav2 main branch (rolling ?), basically an update of #233
Mimicking the style of https://github.com/ros-planning/navigation2/tree/main/nav2_dwb_controller/dwb_core.
setSpeedLimit still need to be properly implemented but was added for build to complete.
Do we still need to pass nav2_util::LifecycleNode::SharedPtr node to the initialize(nav2_util::LifecycleNode::SharedPtr node) function since we have rclcpp_lifecycle::LifecycleNode::WeakPtr nh_ as a member variable which is initialized by TebLocalPlannerROS::configure? @SteveMacenski, you added the argument in #233, what do you think ?

More generally, I see the ros2-master branch of this repo as the ros2 dev branch which should try to stay compatible with the nav2 main branch, am I right @amakarow ? Also it seems that this branch is late on many melodic-devel PRs, any plans to port them ?

[SteveMacenski]

@doisyg this is on my radar right now preping for the galactic release, we should work on getting this merged in / let me take a look now that there's been a few more updates what else may be required

[doisyg]

Great! @SteveMacenski are you a maintener of TEB too ?
I believe the ros2-master (and foxy-devel) is behind the ROS1 branches melodic and noetic for several important PRs.
It would be nice to target to include them for the galactic release. I am willing to commit some resources from my team for that.
First step would be to list the difference and then to decide on a methodology

[SteveMacenski]

I'm not, this is on my list to circle back to, but getting STVL and NPVL up to date with master is coming first before I will come back to this.

Updates on those important noetic/melodic updates would be good. I'm not sure what the best course of action is there. I'm thinking you should submit those against foxy/ros2 first, then the API updates for ros2-master at the end so that you can cherry pick commits without concern of conflicts between them. I'm not sure "how many" we're talking about here. If its not that much code change, you could cherry pick them into this 1 PR. If its too many, probably another PR would be good to merge in those changes that were already approved into foxy/ros2, then these updates.

[SteveMacenski]

Hi, I chatted with @croesmann and he’s given me write permissions to support the ROS2 branch! I’ll follow up here next week

[SteveMacenski]

@doisyg if this builds against Nav2 master, we can merge this

[doisyg]

It does!

[tonynajjar]

Isn't this supposed to be:

cfg_->robot.max_vel_x_backwards = cfg_->robot.base_max_vel_x_backwards * speed_limit / 100.0;
cfg_->robot.max_vel_y = cfg_->robot.base_max_vel_y * speed_limit / 100.0;
cfg_->robot.max_vel_theta = cfg_->robot.base_max_vel_theta * speed_limit / 100.0;

[doisyg]

These lines are inside :
if (speed_limit == nav2_costmap_2d::NO_SPEED_LIMIT) {
so I believe this is the intended behavior

[tonynajjar]

Sorry I copied the wrong snippet, I meant that we should be setting max_vel_* and not base_max_vel_*

See our attempted fix https://github.com/logivations/teb_local_planner/pull/33/files

[tonynajjar]

Created PR #372

[doisyg]

Nice catch