The maintainers meeting is a meeting for the developer team to coordinate on pressing issues and to plan the development of the PX4 Autopilot project, the community is welcome to join and listen, but won’t be able to speak unless specific access is granted ahead of time.
- v1.14 Release
- Proposal: Flight Blender Project Incubation
Optical Flow prearm failure / Random 100% Thrust - Daniel on it
List of PRs Spreadsheet
Might be better to use Github UI
- Adding a reviewer as the column could be helpful
- Could be too exhaustive to go through all the PRs for anyone
- For future: We need to know which PRs are needing release notes
- Need way to keep track of PRs that needs migration notes (e.g. parameter changes etc)
Action Item: Junwoo create another column in Google Sheet to include people who were involved (author / reviewer).
Then, maintainers will use this doc as a reference to ‘remember’ the changes since the last release.
Then, the important items for release notes will be combined in this issue by each maintainer in the thread: [v1.14] High Level Release Notes · Issue #21384 · PX4/PX4-Autopilot · GitHub
Currently, user reports on this min value being not ideal is emerging.
Need to differentiate multirotor case from VTOL, since a single MIN value can’t satisfy both cases.
How can we move forward for integrating this feature?
- Document detailing high level overview of the architecture (of the feature)
- Create high level overview document - salvatore
- Controller overview
- Bullet point items for the actual changes in the PR
The project is being proposed to join DCF, we need to decide if we want to allow this to happen. The project’s author is scheduled to join us on May 2nd with InterUSS Program Manager.
- Is there a pre-exisitng QGC integration? > There is a prototype
- UTMs are currently creating custom QGC changes, so this may help in standardizing that effort
- Has a lot of features (incl. Remote ID)
- We will meet them in May 2nd meeting!
It’s a release blocker, Daniel will take a look.
- Can we make this into a Merge requirement (NuttX compile to not overflow)?
Reason: We rely on joint naming convention for the gz simulation to work, and it’s quite flakey - Jay
String will be better than UINT convention. Just a note on slightly related comment: Layered, lock-free param system by ThomasDebrunner · Pull Request #21252 · PX4/PX4-Autopilot · GitHub