@Martin_Guenther, @dirk-Thomas, @tfoote Thanks for your valuable insights on rationale behind stripping down std_srvs. I also was in understanding that defining common services may not serve much purpose other than probably preventing couple of very similar looking imports from couple of packages sometimes. So I think we are in agreement here that Those should be more semantically defined like. [mypackage1_srvs/GetAwesomeVariable] --- bool value etc. Or in fact if somebody find that his organization probably have lot of such use cases and probably should use a common service signatures they can define a company(organization) wide package for the purpose. [myorganzation_srvs/GetBool] --- bool value etc. --- [Visit Topic](https://discourse.ros.org/t/suggestions-for-std-srvs/1079/11) or reply to this email to respond. If you do not want to receive messages from ros-users please use the unsubscribe link below. If you use the one above, you will stop all of ros-users from receiving updates. ______________________________________________________________________________ ros-users mailing list ros-users@lists.ros.org http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users Unsubscribe: