refactor(perception_online_evaluator): use tier4_metric_msgs instead of diagnostic_msgs

[ktro2828]

Description

This PR changes to apply tier4_metric_msgs to perception_online_evaluator, instead of diagnostic_msgs.

Related links

Parent Issue:

• feat(tier4_metric_msgs): apply tier4_metric_msgs for scenario_simulator_v2_adapter, control_evaluator, planning_evaluator, autonomous_emergency_braking, obstacle_cruise_planner, motion_velocity_planner, processing_time_checker #9180

Private Links:

• TIER IV internal link
• TIER IV internal link: Ticket

How was this PR tested?

Notes for reviewers

None.

Interface changes

Topic changes

Modifications

Version	Topic Type	Topic Name	Message Type	Description
Old	Pub	/metrics	diagnostic_msgs::msg::DiagnosticArray	Diagnostic information about perception accuracy.
New	Pub	/metrics	tier4_metric_msgs::msg::MetricArray	Metric information about perception accuracy.

Effects on system behavior

None.

[github-actions]

Thank you for contributing to the Autoware project!

🚧 If your pull request is in progress, switch it to draft mode.

Please ensure:

• You've checked our contribution guidelines.
• Your PR follows our pull request guidelines.
• All required CI checks pass before marking the PR ready for review.

[ktro2828]

@kosuke55 I have a one question about tier4_metric_msgs::msg::Metric.
Which value should I set to unit in this case? (Currently, I set m for now...)

According to this PR, it seems there are some kind of values are set to unit, such as empty, type and SI unit.

[xtk8532704]

@kosuke55 I have a one question about tier4_metric_msgs::msg::Metric. Which value should I set to unit in this case? (Currently, I set m for now...)

According to this PR, it seems there are some kind of values are set to unit, such as empty, type and SI unit.

Now that we don't have a restriction on the unit, you can set up anything easy to understand in unit. In the future, we may define it in detail like how monitoringmessages-ros2 do, but for now it's just an unused identifier.

[xtk8532704]

ping @kosuke55

[ktro2828]

I will open after fixing to pass unit testings.

[ktro2828]

I fixed CI failures, and set unit to empty string for now because various units are included such as m, rad...

@xtk8532704 @kosuke55 Could check it?

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 95.65217% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 29.49%. Comparing base (b5c98ef) to head (ef51453).
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...evaluator/src/perception_online_evaluator_node.cpp	95.65%	0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #9485   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   29.49%   29.49%           
=======================================
  Files        1444     1446    +2     
  Lines      108520   108546   +26     
  Branches    41389    41395    +6     
=======================================
+ Hits        32008    32018   +10     
- Misses      73393    73408   +15     
- Partials     3119     3120    +1     

Flag	Coverage Δ		*Carryforward flag
differential	17.64% <95.65%> (?)
total	29.48% <ø> (-0.02%)	⬇️	Carriedforward from 7b7db7a

*This pull request uses carry forward flags. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.