[ros-users] [Discourse.ros.org] [General] Discussion on ROS to ROS2 transition plan

[Davide Faconti]

@Hugo @Dejan_Pangercic

You two are clearly looking at ROS from two completely different point of view.

If you don't need real-time and QoS, of course you will not have any reason to move to ROS2.

In the particular case of __lifecycle management__ (point 3) ), I personally believe that without it very awful code is inevitable.

But again, if you are interested in the proof-of-concept, who cares?

This is not a  a discussion about ROS2 vs ROS1 and if it was, it would be clearly "ROS1 is sufficient for academic and hobbyists use, ROS2 is trying to solve multiple __important__ issues that many industries are very concerned about".

About point 5), people that __do need__ real-time requirements are (or must be)  aware about the problem of priority inversion; the operative system itself helps avoiding it.

As far as i know, message passing is one of the best design patterns to avoid  dead-locks.
Furthermore, real-time applications are __multi-threaded__ and __single process__, not single thread as you mentioned.





---
[Visit Topic](https://discourse.ros.org/t/discussion-on-ros-to-ros2-transition-plan/6155/81) or reply to this email to respond.