[Documentation] [TitleIndex] [WordIndex

bond/Reviews/2011-01-19_Doc_Review

Please review:

Reviewer:

Instructions for doing a doc review

See DocReviewProcess for more instructions

  1. Does the documentation define the Users of your Package, i.e. for the expected usages of your Stack, which APIs will users engage with?
  2. Are all of these APIs documented?
  3. Do relevant usages have associated tutorials? (you can ignore this if a Stack-level tutorial covers the relevant usage), and are the indexed in the right places?
  4. If there are hardware dependencies of the Package, are these documented?
  5. Is it clear to an outside user what the roadmap is for the Package?
  6. Is it clear to an outside user what the stability is for the Package?
  7. Are concepts introduced by the Package well illustrated?
  8. Is the research related to the Package referenced properly? i.e. can users easily get to relevant papers?
  9. Are any mathematical formulas in the Package not covered by papers properly documented?

Jeremy

  1. Does the documentation define the Users of your Package, i.e. for the expected usages of your Stack, which APIs will users engage with?
    • Yes -- anyone wanting to ensure two processes can monitor each others termination
  2. Are all of these APIs documented?
    • No. Example usage is partially documented, but the details underlying Bond API is not explained. If I wanted to use bond with rosjs I would have to start digging into code. If this API is intended to be private, it should be stated as such. Furthermore, in both the cpp and python API, I don't understand how the generated unique_id is transmitted from the server to the client. There are a number of public members of the C++ class with no documentation whatsoever. I can make intelligent guesses about most of them though.
  3. Do relevant usages have associated tutorials? (you can ignore this if a Stack-level tutorial covers the relevant usage), and are the indexed in the right places?
    • There are short example usages for roscpp and rospy but they are missing informatoin such as the necessary includes. There is no high-level tutorial, where I actually bring up 2 nodes, break the bond, and see it work.
  4. If there are hardware dependencies of the Package, are these documented?
    • N/A
  5. Is it clear to an outside user what the roadmap is for the Package?
    • No
  6. Is it clear to an outside user what the stability is for the Package?
    • No -- It's part of a 1.0+ stack, which makes me think it should be stable, but it's also new. I have no real idea what to expect.
  7. Are concepts introduced by the Package well illustrated?
    • At the highest level, yes. But there is no explanation of what is actually happening with the heartbeat.
  8. Is the research related to the Package referenced properly? i.e. can users easily get to relevant papers?
    • N/A
  9. Are any mathematical formulas in the Package not covered by papers properly documented?
    • N/A

For each launch file in a Package

  1. Is it clear how to run that launch file?
    • N/A
  2. Does the launch file start up with no errors when run correctly?
    • N/A
  3. Do the Nodes in that launch file correctly use ROS_ERROR/ROS_WARN/ROS_INFO logging levels?
    • N/A

Concerns / issues

Jeremy

Conclusion


2019-11-16 12:40