rospy/Reviews/2010-01-07_Doc_Review

Reviewer:

• Tim
• Nate

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?
   • Nate: Yes
2. Are all of these APIs documented?
   • Nate: Yes
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?
   • Nate: Yes
4. Is it clear to an outside user what the roadmap is for the Package?
   • Nate: Yes
5. Is it clear to an outside user what the stability is for the Package?
   • Nate: Yes
6. Are concepts introduced by the Package well illustrated?
   • Nate: Yes, the tutorials cover this.
7. Is the research related to the Package referenced properly? i.e. can users easily get to relevant papers?
   • Nate: N/A

Concerns / issues

Conclusion

Nate: Looks good.

Tim:

• Looks good. One thing, in rospy/Overview/Messages: "The in-order style is beneficial when you want your code to be brittle to msg changes." I'm not sure why you'd want this to be the case. Is this comment meant to be tongue-in-cheek?

  • not tongue-in-cheek. There are times where you don't want code to work if a message has been changed as Python has no handy type-checking or compilation to catch such things. I clarified this.
• p.s. rospy.Rate is very handy - I'm glad I read these docs to find out about it.