rsi_hw_iface: semantics of 'rsi/address' and 'rsi/port' params unclear

[gavanderhoorn]

Perhaps only for me, but because of the structure of the rsi_hw_interface node, rsi/address and rsi/port configure the address and port combination to which the UDP socket created by UDPServer is bound, and thus should correspond to an ip local to the ROS host running the rsi_hw_interface node.

[gavanderhoorn]

I suggest changing these to rsi/local_address and rsi/local_port.

We could perhaps include ros somewhere, but I'm not sure I like rsi/ros_address and rsi/ros_port too much. Maybe rsi/address_ros and rsi/port_ros.

@tingelst, @pgorczak. @bj0rkedal ?

[tingelst]

I suggest changing these to rsi/local_address and rsi/local_port. I agree.

[bj0rkedal]

Agreed, rsi/local_address and rsi/local_port is clearer.

[gavanderhoorn]

Another suggestion (and I like this best):

rsi:
   listen_address: "1.2.3.4"
   listen_port: 49152

This more clearly conveys the fact that the node uses these to determine on which IP address and port it should listen for incoming RSI traffic from the controller.

[gavanderhoorn]

See #63 for a PR that renames the parameters to listen_address and listen_port.

[gavanderhoorn]

@tingelst @bj0rkedal: any comments?

[bj0rkedal]

In my opinion it's a good improvement. I think this should make it clear to any user what's configured. With additional input from the expanded documentation it should not take long to get a working system.

[BrettHemes]

Personally I find this much clearer and vote for the listen_address/port naming (I had renamed them to rsi_listener_ip/port in my launch files).

[gavanderhoorn]

Fixed in f9224e4.