I agree with @Hugo that ROS2 must get the “default values” right so that only people with very special needs should care about learning this, not the 90% of us that is happy with the one-fits-all configuration.
I trust that people developing ROS2 share the same vision, i.e. simplicity first, fine tuning for those who care.
Probably ROS2 is “not there yet” in terms of simplicity, but I hope it will.
Similarly, I agree with @jbohren that unless you know the needs of your stakeholders, you can’t have a clear roadmap.
So we all agree and everyone is happy…
Buuuuuuut, I believe that OSRF has been sufficiently transparent about its vision.
And bear in mind that I am not one of “those” ROS evangelists that worship ROS 
My last words in this thread (I don’t believe that I have anything else constructive to add) is that, in my personal opinion, a world where ROS2 replaces ROS1 and they do not coexist, will be a better world. I doubt I will see this anytime soon, though.
I want to believe that one day ROS2 will be as beginner friendly as ROS1, but it will take time and resources (including economic resources).
Cheers
Davide