> * Are these really Groovy release planning groups? Or, design
> discussions for ROS 2.0?
These SIG are not necessarily meant to deliver something working for Groovy.
E.g. RosNG is more conceptional design and does not necessarily imply any client library implementation
It is very likely that they will be continued for the H-turtle or subsequent SIGs will build on-top of their results.
> * Is there a written design proposal for all this? Or, is that the
> goal of the groups?
It is the goal of the SIGs to work on the design proposal, discuss various options and ponder the pros and cons.
There have been discussions and thought about "where to go" but they should flow into the SIG (since they are not yet fixed by any means).
So please feel free to extend the SIG pages with thought, goals etc.
As soon as the mailing lists are setup we can start the discussion there.
> * Are these issues so clear that breaking the discussion into three
> separate groups makes sense?
We had some interesting discussions on the ROSCon last weekend.
It seems that all three topics are orthogonal to a certain degree.
If it turns out that there is overlapping the SIGs should coordinate between each other.
Dirk
(text/plain)