[JTC] Continue with last trajectory-point on success (backport #842)

[mergify]

This is an automatic backport of pull request #842 done by Mergify.

---

Mergify commands and options

More conditions and actions can be found in the documentation.

You can also trigger Mergify actions by commenting on this pull request:

• @Mergifyio refresh will re-evaluate the rules
• @Mergifyio rebase will rebase this PR on its base branch
• @Mergifyio update will merge the base branch into this PR
• @Mergifyio backport <destination> will backport this PR on <destination> branch

Additionally, on Mergify dashboard you can:

• look at your merge queues
• generate the Mergify configuration with the config editor.

Finally, you can contact us on https://mergify.com

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 72.76%. Comparing base (9b5e04a) to head (cff51a6).

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             iron     #877      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   72.72%   72.76%   +0.03%     
==========================================
  Files          40       40              
  Lines        3505     3510       +5     
  Branches     1750     1753       +3     
==========================================
+ Hits         2549     2554       +5     
  Misses        659      659              
  Partials      297      297              

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	72.76% <100.00%> (+0.03%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files	Coverage Δ
...jectory_controller/joint_trajectory_controller.hpp	100.00% <ø> (ø)
...ory_controller/src/joint_trajectory_controller.cpp	80.19% <100.00%> (+0.13%)	⬆️

[bmagyar]

maybe asking the obvious but I think this behaviour change would not be too welcome in Iron at this point... perhaps a flag?

[christophfroehlich]

maybe asking the obvious but I think this behaviour change would not be too welcome in Iron at this point... perhaps a flag?

From the feedback we got on rolling, the "old" behavior (stopping at the position at the time of reaching the tolerances) was not desired, which means that this PR is more kind of a bug-fix.