Instructions for doing a doc review
See DocReviewProcess for more instructions
- 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, users should typically not use the launch files in this package. The doc refers to the pr2 manual and the command line tool.
- Are all of these APIs documented?
- 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?
- The pr2 manual is the right place for detailed documentation.
- If there are hardware dependencies of the Package, are these documented?
- Yes. This package depends on the full pr2 robot
- Is it clear to an outside user what the roadmap is for the Package?
- Is it clear to an outside user what the stability is for the Package?
- Yes, it will have the 1.0 label/
- Are concepts introduced by the Package well illustrated?
- Is the research related to the Package referenced properly? i.e. can users easily get to relevant papers?
- Are any mathematical formulas in the Package not covered by papers properly documented?
For each launch file in a Package
- Is it clear how to run that launch file?
- Only one launch file is relevant. The doc shows how to run this.
- Does the launch file start up with no errors when run correctly?
- There still are errors, but they are caused by packages in other stacks, and have tickets.
- Do the Nodes in that launch file correctly use ROS_ERROR/ROS_WARN/ROS_INFO logging levels?
Concerns / issues
- Good to go!