Hi Bill,
I understand your reservations. When/if we make an announcement about a
candidate release, we can -- and should! -- identify known issues. (For
example, control of Icom rigs via Commander and direct control of
FT-817/FT-857/FT-897 rigs.) People with those rigs and control systems
should be told about the potential issues. They may want to stay with
what works, i.e., an earlier version.
On the other hand, it seems to me there is much to be gained by allowing
more people to test and provide feedback on the many other new features
and capabilities now in the program.
-- Joe
On 5/23/2014 2:54 PM, Bill Somerville wrote:
> On 23/05/2014 19:36, Joe Taylor wrote:
>> Hi all,
> Hi Joe,
>>
>> I'll be traveling again and mostly out of email contact from tomorrow
>> through June 3. A couple of thoughts, before I leave:
>>
>> 1. Can we get a version of WSJT-X suitable for a beta release ready in
>> the reasonably near future? It doesn't need to be perfect. For
>> example, if there are still rig-control issues with a few specific rigs,
>> we can let that be known. There is so much good stuff in the current
>> version, it's too bad that most users still have r3673 or earlier.
> I am a little uneasy about this because there are major issues with rig
> control of Icom rigs via DX Labs Suite commander and the direct control
> of the FT-817/FT-857/FT-897 series is fundamentally flawed.
>
> For the former I am waiting on Dave AA6YQ to hopefully make the TCP/IP
> more managable but I feel that he has lost interest in favour of other
> more pressing user facing issues for the Suite. I am reluctant to push
> him on this as he has helped a lot already.
>
> For the Yaesu FT-8x7 series I am working through a complete rewrite of
> the Hamlib back end for them, it is going well but will take a bit
> longer to complete.
>
> I suppose a beta/release candidate would be OK but I am wary of being
> flooded with a whole series of complaints about the rig interface not
> working where it appeared to work before.
>
> As for making a release candidate, anyone who has NSIS installed and can
> build on Windows with CMake should be able to prepare an installer by
> using 'cmake --build<release-build-dir> --target package'.
>
> The documentation needs some love around the the settings dialog area
> and the new waterfall features. If anyone wants to help with the docs on
> WSJT-X I am happy to help by explaining the subtleties of the new
> settings dialog.
>>
>> 2. Chase asked about the possibility of merging the documentation for
>> WSPR and WSPR-X. I'm not fundamentally opposed; but on the other hand
>> WSPR-X is rather a step-child in some ways, ignored by most. It's not
>> clear that it has much of a near-term future, as the higher priorities
>> all seem to be elsewhere.
>>
>> I do think, however, that we should re-do the WSPR documentation in the
>> new, asciidoc-based way.
>>
>> -- 73, Joe, K1JT
> 73
> Bill
> G4WJS.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
> Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos.
> Get unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available
> Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
> _______________________________________________
> wsjt-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE
Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos.
Get unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available
Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
_______________________________________________
wsjt-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
