You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
After an internal discussion during our board meeting, we decided to revert PR #328.
This is because the convention for the CSYS is limited to the alignment of their axes wrt a resting position of the robot, but doesn't include the directions of rotation. In practical terms, this means that the same joint angles guarantee a specular symmetry between the arms.
Reverting #328 is as simple as clicking a button, although we may need to carry out a careful review.
After an internal discussion during our board meeting, we decided to revert PR #328.
This is because the convention for the CSYS is limited to the alignment of their axes wrt a resting position of the robot, but doesn't include the directions of rotation. In practical terms, this means that the same joint angles guarantee a specular symmetry between the arms.
Reverting #328 is as simple as clicking a button, although we may need to carry out a careful review.
cc @Lawproto @Nicogene @fiorisi @traversaro
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: