Spwaner: Load controller with remote only .yaml #2853
+129
−27
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Replaces: #2349
There are cases in which you want to spawn controllers running on a remote machine (robot) without the
controllers.yamlbeeing available on the local machine. This PR extends the spawner with the option to activate a controller on the remote machine without the need of havingcontrollers.yamlon your local machine.Example:
Open questions
How to pass controller type? In the spawner we need to know at least the
controller nameand thecontroller type. Usually we would parse the type from thecontroller.yamlbut since the file is not present on the local machine we need to pass the type. I choose to do:controller:typeas can be seen in the example. Is this good?How should we go about testing? In tests the file will always be present. I would just define the
.yamlin code, don't have the file present and test like this or are there any other suggestions?