The only respect in which that appears to be true is that no major browser vendor has yet committed to supporting HTTP/2 other than over TLS-encrypted connections.

But given that that both some HTTP/2-supporting browssers and much of the server-side software supporting HTTP/2 is open source, and given that all the logic will be implemented and the only change will be allowing it on unencrypted TCP connection, it'll probably be fairly straightforward to anyone who cares much to put the proof of concept of the value of unencrypted HTTP/2 together.

OTOH, the main gain of HTTP/2 seems to be on secure connections, so I'm not sure why one would want unencrypted HTTP/2 over unencrypted HTTP/1.1, and given that no browser seems to have short-term plans to stop supporting HTTP/1.1, there's probably no real use case.

But the protocol supports unencrypted use just fine.

IIRC, the main issue with nonTLS HTTP/2 is broken web proxies. This is why Google deployed SPDY in https only, and also why they didn't use SCTP as the basis, but instead reinvented about 50% of it on top of TCP.

Google didn't want something that would break even a tiny percentage of existing installs.