All, thanks for the input so far, keep it coming!
A few comments.
- I plan to create a github.com repo for this (hopefully under github.com/ros2 namepace, working on that), and will start capturing the wish list items and requirements, as well as documenting design decisions, etc. This thread is just the primer for that.
- The many different types of maps requested, to me means we need a more abstract data type for maps, that can represent many different types of maps that might be inputs to the system. I’m not sure what that will be exactly yet, but to me, this illustrates that we need to decouple the map type as much as possible from the system.
- I also agree on the use of ROS2 nodes for the low level plug-ins like global and local planning. That will improve decoupling and make it easier to replace those components with other algorithms, and will also ease the debug effort as pointed out before. We can do this using shared memory pointer passing so that the performance overhead is small.
Keep the feedback coming!