>
> Note here that all the goals that OSRF presents are perfectly achievable
> using a different strategy: ROS1.5. ROS1.5 means building nodes that talk
> via the ROS1 protocol, but are built using ROS2 infrastructure and
> libraries.


Another view of "ROS1.5" would be where APIs (especially the C++ API) are
maintained even as the underlying transport and serialization is changed
around, an improved node/nodelet/launch scheme is developed, etc.

I support the DDS direction, but it does seem to be an all-or-nothing
affair, and that's one of the biggest bummers about it.

M.