Thanks for the clarification Patrick. +0, then -Ryan On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 10:20 PM, Patrick Mihelich wrote: > Hi Ryan, > > On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 6:54 PM, Ryan Gariepy < > rgariepy@clearpathrobotics.com> wrote: > >> -0 >> >> Will these changes will affect nodes outside of the openni stack? If so, >> can these effects be enumerated? Will we need to update all of the >> TurtleBot demo code, for instance? >> >> Also, the REP does not state a clear motivation for doing this. Is what >> we have causing problems, or is it just "not ideal"? #117 is >> similar but concisely states reasons for why the work should be done, and >> how it'll impact past code. >> > > I didn't adequately explain the context of this REP. It proposes *no > changes*, except to discourage use of the old and flawed > sensor_msgs/DisparityImage message. The purpose is to codify and document > the convention used by the OpenNI stack. > > Cheers, > Patrick > > _______________________________________________ > ros-users mailing list > ros-users@code.ros.org > https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users > >