@prasenjitdan I also came here to comment about all the packages you’re going to convert to ROS2. First off: Thanks for doing that, it seems that ROS2 is really taking off now!
Are you planning on forking the existing ROS1 packages into separate repos for ROS2? If yes, I believe that would be a very bad idea. IMO, ROS2 versions of packages should remain in the same repo as the ROS1 version under a new branch called ros2 or similar. For example, this is how it was done for vision_msgs:
The reason why I believe this is important is that when you do a fork, the ROS1 and ROS2 versions will diverge over time. When they remain in the same repo, there is a higher chance of changes being backported between the versions. This is especially important for msg packages; we don’t want inconsistent definitions of msgs between ROS1 and ROS2!