Manipulator variants naming convention about abb HOT 3 CLOSED

Not really well known (as it's only referenced from the tutorials pages), but we have some guidelines for naming artefacts in ROS-Industrial. See here for the ROS wiki page, and here for a draft version of a possible REP.

The fanuc and fanuc_experimental repositories can both serve as examples of what the above referenced documents describe.

So for your question specifically: you could create a abb_irb1600_support package, which would contain all variants of the 'base' IRB-1600 model. The main abb repository currently doesn't follow that model yet, but it will be converted to the new layout. The abb_experimental repository contains a abb_irb4400_support package which can serve as an example.

This would remove the '1.2' from the package name at least (but move it to the naming of the urdf/xacros and entities within those files). I think it would be a good thing to wait for some more opinions here, as the dot-case isn't covered by the current guidelines.

from abb.

The "_" generally replaces the " ", so lets stick with that convention. Since the . is not allowed to be in package names, we should probably not use it in file names or urdf xacros. I'd like to stay consistent across all of these in order to avoid confusion (all the names should match). So I guess this means we just leave the . out of the name.

from abb.

We should add all 1600 variants in a support package then, with subdirectories for each variant.

from abb.