>From my observations there's really two systems that exist within ROS1. There's the 'core' middleware and then the communities applications/programs that exist around it. OSRF still maintains most of the core middleware and is a major responsibility for them.
I guess the conflict of interest situation is like this, from my understanding: Those who have the money to pay to support ROS1, want to use ROS2 to advance their interests and make their products better. Therefore, those using ROS1 won't have any one to pay to maintain the core product of ROS1 and thus ROS1 is 'unmaintained'.
Originally, who was funding ROS1? Why'd that stop? It's clear there is a large majority of members who rely on the 'core' ROS1 parts which will in the near future be abandoned.
I guess of course everyone will just have to suck it up and follow industry's trends if they aren't willing to cough up the bill for ROS1, however.
---
[Visit Topic](
https://discourse.ros.org/t/discussion-on-ros-to-ros2-transition-plan/6155/91) 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: <
http://lists.ros.org/mailman//options/ros-users>
(text/plain)