I've recently released roslibrust_mcap which utilizes the message types and serialization / deserialization capabilities of the roslibrust ecosystem to provide a type safe API over ROS2's mcap files.
Ultimately I think it would be cool if I could have a roslibrust_bag crate that had backend support for ROS1 and ROS2 bag files and their respective message formats.
The main question I have is should I extend this crate to depend on roslibrust_common and roslibrust_serde_rosmsg to provide a type safe API directly in this crate, or should I create a new crate roslibrust_rosbag that wraps this crate in a typesafe layer.
I've recently released roslibrust_mcap which utilizes the message types and serialization / deserialization capabilities of the roslibrust ecosystem to provide a type safe API over ROS2's mcap files.
Ultimately I think it would be cool if I could have a roslibrust_bag crate that had backend support for ROS1 and ROS2 bag files and their respective message formats.
The main question I have is should I extend this crate to depend on roslibrust_common and roslibrust_serde_rosmsg to provide a type safe API directly in this crate, or should I create a new crate roslibrust_rosbag that wraps this crate in a typesafe layer.