Brian, this is a point that does not reflect my personal experience/knowledge, but one that I heard of a couple of times when we recently talked about the topic (at ROS for Products Workshop and our recent meeting at OSRF), where some argued about the qualities that current ROS middleware provides. So it is totally non-validated by myself, which is why I said "obviously". Not sure if it was even William who mentioned this once? Nik -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: ros-users-bounces@lists.ros.org [mailto:ros-users-bounces@lists.ros.org] Im Auftrag von Brian Gerkey Gesendet: Donnerstag, 13. Februar 2014 17:58 An: User discussions Betreff: Re: [ros-users] ROS & DDS On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 3:38 AM, Nikolai Ensslen wrote: > However we also think it makes sense not to replace the traditional > ROS middleware but to just add DDS spec to it, maybe replacing some > elements that make sense after some time. Backwards compatibility is > important and there are some things ROS middleware is obviously good > at that DDS can't provide, e.g. messaging or streaming larger amounts of data. Can you say more about this point? I'm very interested in learning about use cases where DDS can't meet our messaging needs in the robotics / embedded systems space. > We'd be happy to contribute to the efforts of adding DDS as a > middleware choice to ROS. Outstanding! brian. _______________________________________________ ros-users mailing list ros-users@lists.ros.org http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users _______________________________________________ ros-users mailing list ros-users@lists.ros.org http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users