feat: add ROS 2 bindings to the official specification#1109
feat: add ROS 2 bindings to the official specification#1109asyncapi-bot merged 7 commits intoasyncapi:masterfrom
Conversation
amparo-siemens
requested review from
GreenRover,
asyncapi-bot-eve,
char0n,
dalelane,
derberg and
fmvilas
as code owners
![github-actions[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/15368?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Welcome to AsyncAPI. Thanks a lot for creating your first pull request. Please check out our contributors guide useful for opening a pull request.
Keep in mind there are also other channels you can use to interact with AsyncAPI community. For more details check out this issue.
|
amparo-siemens
changed the title
fmvilas
left a comment
fmvilas
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think there are many more places where you should add it. A quick search for the "bindings" word gives me a bunch of different results. IIRC, you're still missing operationTraitsBindings and componentsServerBindings, componentsChannelBindings, etc. Probably somewhere else I'm not remembering right now.
Hi @fmvilas thank you for your help one more time, but i am not being able to find in this repo any of the places that you mention. Could you clarify where are them? I searched the word bindings and also checked with the last feat that I found (pulsar) and i am not being able to find them, sorry |
fmvilas
left a comment
fmvilas
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You're completely, right. My bad, sorry. Looks good as it is 👍
|
@derberg @dalelane @GreenRover @char0n Mind having a look too? |
dalelane
left a comment
dalelane
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why "ros2" (as opposed to just "ros") ?
When there is a future updated version of the middleware, would this require a new "ros3" binding?
(I'm unfamiliar with ROS, so apologies if the answer to this is obvious with context that I'm missing!)
|
/dnm just adding the label so we do not merge accidently as this is a new addition, which means we will need to start working on v3.1 |
We think it definitely make sense to call it "ros2" since there are specific parameters related to ROS 2 that will not work with ROS. Evenmore, ROS is end of life so we believe that ROS 2 should be the name. |
|
This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity 😴 It will be closed in 120 days if no further activity occurs. To unstale this pull request, add a comment with detailed explanation. There can be many reasons why some specific pull request has no activity. The most probable cause is lack of time, not lack of interest. AsyncAPI Initiative is a Linux Foundation project not owned by a single for-profit company. It is a community-driven initiative ruled under open governance model. Let us figure out together how to push this pull request forward. Connect with us through one of many communication channels we established here. Thank you for your patience ❤️ |
@dalelane it make sense. We only provide only single |
|
@amparosancho since this is the only branch related to release I pushed other changes required and specified in release process document |
|
|
/rtm |
|
🎉 This PR is included in version 3.1.0 🎉 The release is available on GitHub release Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀 |
7 participants
title: "Add ROS 2 bindings and protocol to the official specification" by SIEMENS AG
Related issue(s):
ROS 2 binding PR
The ROS 2 binding was finalized in the Bindings repository.
This PR adds the new
ros2binding in the Server Object, Channel Object, Operation Object and Message Object.Along with adding
ros2to the protocol list.