-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Allow loading variants for MuJoCo descriptions #76
Allow loading variants for MuJoCo descriptions #76
Conversation
Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 8786290992Details
💛 - Coveralls |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank you for this feature that can be immediately useful to MuJoCo users 👍 I suggest we roll it in a backward-compatible manner with v1.10+, then have a more advanced variant mechanism for v2.
Co-authored-by: Stéphane Caron <stephane.caron@inria.fr>
029218c
to
8c6abf7
Compare
Just chiming in that I disagree that scene should be the default. |
Yes, this was the original proposal but we have changed it in f609695. Now the PR is backward compatible and one should pass |
Thank you for this contribution @fabinsch 😃 |
Thank you @fabinsch and @stephane-caron! |
Hi @stephane-caron ,
thanks for this nice library to load a bunch of robot models with different frameworks. Lately I was trying some mujoco models and I had a quick fix locally to load the
scene.xml
(which was more useful in my case).I saw #74 and also #62 and thought that a minimal adaptation allowing for both could be the change proposed in this PR.
This adds a
variant
keyword, that I set thescene
by default. If a robot has noscene.xml
, it will still just load the pure robot model as define in each specific file per robot. With this solution, we do not have to modify every single file but I am very open to changes and happy to integrate your remarks.