Skip to content

Feat: add temporary parent frames to be supported (Fixes #36 Issue)#53

Draft
cellios-fbr wants to merge 2 commits intoipa320:noetic-develfrom
Vorsten:feat/temporary_parent_frames
Draft

Feat: add temporary parent frames to be supported (Fixes #36 Issue)#53
cellios-fbr wants to merge 2 commits intoipa320:noetic-develfrom
Vorsten:feat/temporary_parent_frames

Conversation

@cellios-fbr
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Issue #36 is about having support for temporary frames.
This setup enables users to create temporary frames that can serve as parents for other temporary frames. It also prevents users from setting temporary frames as parents of non-temporary frames.
Additionally, the temporary frames are now displayed on the right.
The frames are still do not being saved to the frames.yml file.

Should the temporary frames be grouped together in a group called "Temporary"? Should there be a button to refresh the list of frames on the right?

I'm not sure if this feature is still requested. If not, we can happily discard it.

@ipa-danb
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

ipa-danb commented Mar 2, 2026

Hi, thanks for the contribution,

Issue #36 is about having support for temporary frames.
This setup enables users to create temporary frames that can serve as parents for other temporary frames. It also prevents users from setting temporary frames as parents of non-temporary frames.
Additionally, the temporary frames are now displayed on the right.
The frames are still do not being saved to the frames.yml file.

Should the temporary frames be grouped together in a group called "Temporary"? Should there be a button to refresh the list of frames on the right?

I think there is already a refresh functionality of the frame editor on the right window, i think even with a button.
However, it only works if the frame-editor is in dynamic publishing mode, not static (b/c its not possible to delete static frames from the tf tree, i.e., refreshing will not change anything).
At some point, it would nice to have some further grouping options on the right window. One option would be to use the grouping from the left window for that. however, this adds some complexity.

I'm not sure if this feature is still requested. If not, we can happily discard it.

tbh, ive never used that feature, but its probably useful for the service api. However, the only thing i can promise is that i wont get to reviewing your PR till end of April :/

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants