Hi Bill and all,
Next topic...
On 5/25/2015 6:12 AM, Bill Somerville wrote:
> Joe, are you proposing that the JT4 and other VHF and up features are
> released along with the WSPR features? I am a little uncomfortable with
> that as it is a lot of new content for one release and I suspect that
> both the JT4 tranche of work and the WSPR tranche both will have some
> destabilizing effect, do we want to move to supporting both in one
> release or would a phased release be easier to deal with? Having said
> that, I think the WSPR user base will be the larger one so a release
> adding just JT4& VHF features may not get much traction.
Yes, I guess I'm proposing that we do it all at once. We have already
had important feedback on the new JT4 and WSPR features from a few
knowledgeable users, and it seems a step backward to release something
with one (but not both) of the new modes.
> What is clear to me is that these new changes will bring two distinct
> new communities to WSJT-X, the WSPR beacon users and the VHF& up EME
> users. We must be careful not to underestimate the number of yet to be
> discovered issues that these users will uncover right through from
> fundamental defects to nuances that might deter them from upgrading from
> their current applications.
The JT4 user community is and will remain rather small. A good fraction
of the potential users have already been using v1.6.1 r5318 (mostly for
10 GHz EME) and reporting bugs and wanted features to me. Additional
users will surely appear following a more public release, but the total
number will remain small compared with the overall WSJT-X user base. I
consider this small user group very important: JT4 is one of the areas
in which we are making trail-blazing contributions to the art of ham
radio weak-signal communications.
The WSPR user group is potentially much larger. For a number of reasons
I would like to make it attractive for most of them to move their
WSPRing to WSJT-X as soon as we can. At present, Python-based WSPR
versions 2.0, 2.11, 2.12, 3.0, and 4.0 are all "current" at some level,
and this state of affairs is a maintenance nuisance.
There's always lots of inertia, but from a "features" point of view
there's a very good case for upgrading to WSJT-X. Having the
quasi-beacon WSPR mode and the JT9/JT65 QSO modes available in one
program will seen as a significant plus by some users; advantages
specific to WSPR mode include a real-time waterfall with flexible
configuration options and a faster and better decoder.
Finally, of course, there's a large group of VHF-and-up users of WSJT
that we should be planning to support in WSJT-X or another Qt-based
program. (Their number is not as large as that of the HF-oriented users
of JT65 and JT9, but it's probably more than 1000 users.) JT65A, B, and
C are all important for EME. I think our consensus is that the "fast
modes" (FSK441, JTMS, JT6M, ISCAT) should be supported in a separate
(but closely related) program.
-- Joe, K1JT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One dashboard for servers and applications across Physical-Virtual-Cloud
Widest out-of-the-box monitoring support with 50+ applications
Performance metrics, stats and reports that give you Actionable Insights
Deep dive visibility with transaction tracing using APM Insight.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/290420510;117567292;y
_______________________________________________
wsjt-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
