Re: [ros-users] ROS & DDS

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 <nensslen@synapticon.com>
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