Probably the best question is how much experience have you had with open
source. I can only go by what actually is taking place every day with
major programs that have been built and maintained by large numbers of
volunteers and paid staff. Firefox, Apache, Thunderbird, Linux versions,
the
Steve,
I am surprised that you do not understand the basic technical issues
here since you appear to be claiming that there is no such thing as the
hidden transmitter.
A human operator can not determine the paths present at the remote
automatically controlled station. That is why there is
Rud,
Many, many incredibly successful projects use open source. In fact, many
large projects could never have been developed any other way since they
were otherwise not financially viable. Enough said.
Now about the server vs Winlink 2000. A PMBO is a server to the RF side
of the system as
Rick,
I don't share your dream Rick, sorry that you did not like that
description, but I was trying to be polite about it. I am not here to
stop you or anyone from pursuing your dreams, go learn C++ or Ada and
start coding it up into your dream communications software. However I
am a realist
All,
Why not use spread spectrum approach?
73 Leo (AA2AJ)
Steve Hajducek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Dave,
Thanks for jumping in here with Rick and I, if you read my reply that I just
sent in response to Rick I feel you will see that I pretty much already touched
on your points,
Hi Dave,
Thanks for jumping in here with Rick and I, if you read my reply that
I just sent in response to Rick I feel you will see that I pretty
much already touched on your points, I see that you would personally
turn off automatic frequency detection as you prefer the human
factor, no
Would you say this is true with any Automatic Station ?
RTTY - Amtor as well as Pactor or even PSK mail.
The reason I ask is I was reading the mail up on 7103.5 last
evening between 2 pactor station, when someone on packet
called up another packet station right on top of them.
I really fail
let's get something going that works like Pactor
2 in
software.
Howard K5HB
- Original Message
From: Rick [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 7:48:15 AM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Need new emergency communications mode: Server
Steve,
This is not a dream of mine. This is what eventually will have to be if
automatic operation is to continue to be permitted on amateur
frequencies. This attitude that the automatic stations are more
important than human operated stations is simply not a wise position to
take on a shared
Rick,
At 03:21 PM 10/18/2007, you wrote:
Steve,
This is not a dream of mine. This is what eventually will have to be if
automatic operation is to continue to be permitted on amateur
frequencies.
Its just a dream on your part and other until such time rules ever
require it Rick.
This
.
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Steve Hajducek
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 7:09 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [digitalradio] Need new emergency communications mode
Dave,
As simple as I can
Dave,
As simple as I can put it for you, it is my opinion that the better
solution is separation into sub bands is the only logical solution to
your perceived issues with automated stations triggered by remote
users as technology as we know it now (and likely for a very long
time to come)
] On
Behalf Of John Becker, WØJAB
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 10:39 AM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [digitalradio] Need new emergency communications mode
Would you say this is true with any Automatic Station ?
RTTY - Amtor as well as Pactor or even PSK mail.
The reason I ask
: Thursday, October 18, 2007 5:22:18 PM
Subject: RE: [digitalradio] Need new emergency communications mode
I have suggested that automatic busy detection be disabled on unattended
stations handling during emergencies. This has nothing to do with preferring
the human factor, whatever that might
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Steve Hajducek
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 10:02 AM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [digitalradio] Need new emergency communications mode
Hi Dave,
Thanks for jumping in here with Rick and I, if you read my reply that I just
sent
This is not a new problem. It goes back to the early 1970's that I know of.
When RTTY had WRU's. Packet, Amtor and, as most like to pick on,
the Pactor stations. even keyboard to keyboard just because they hear
a pactor station.
But it seems to me that nobody complained like this till the PSK
, October 18, 2007 6:52 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [digitalradio] Need new emergency communications mode
This is not a new problem. It goes back to the early 1970's that I know of.
When RTTY had WRU's. Packet, Amtor and, as most like to pick on,
the Pactor stations. even
Hi Rick,
I feel compelled once again to make some statements on the subject of
frequency busy detection.
1. Item 5 makes no sense to this station unless you have Automatic
Station initiating contacts to forward traffic, whereas Automatic
Station A has 1 to number of messages queued and needs
My web site, see signature, is for the development of such a network. Anyone
who wants to work collaboratively on a network is invited to let me know of
their interest.
There is another mailing list where I have discussed the development of a
network. They say managing software developers is like
Before you can say anything about setting up a server you need to determine
what the server is to do.
The primary purpose of the Winlink servers is to route messages to their
destination. However, the Emcomm PMBOs can provide local routing of messages
when needed, i.e. an area is isolated from
I am curious as to the negative attitude of ham developers toward open
source development. Many successful applications programs have been open
source have they not?
These include very complicated and advanced programs that are better
than some of the commercial developed closed source
Isn't this exactly what can be accomplished with open source collaboration?
How does it work now with PSKmail?
The main thing is to insure that no additional complications are needed
that can be yet another failure point. This is one of my criticisms of
Winlink 2000 and why I don't consider it
It's the programmers choice to make it open
But it seems to me that some feel cheated if it's not.
Either way I can live with it.
John, W0JAB
@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Rick
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 5:07 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Need new emergency communications mode: Project
Management
I am curious as to the negative attitude of ham developers toward open
source
, October 17, 2007 5:21 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Need new emergency communications mode: Server
Isn't this exactly what can be accomplished with open source collaboration?
How does it work now with PSKmail?
The main thing is to insure that no additional
The reason for the open source concept in my mind is to insure
continuity of a project in case of death or disinterest by the initial
developers. I don't buy the too many cooks analogy in any way.
Completely wrong metaphor for software development. No one is in the way
of another, rather they
-Original Message-
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Rick
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 9:40 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Need new emergency communications mode: Project
Management
The reason for the open source concept
AA6YQ comments below
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Steve Hajducek
snip
2. With respect to Remote User to Automatic Station communications,
the human operator initiates the communications and its all up to
them to decide the coast is clear to do
, AA6YQ
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Rick
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 6:07 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Need new emergency communications mode: Project
Management
I am curious as to the negative
Rud,
Running Linux in an old box requires an old version of Linux, matched to
the box contents.
I used RedHat 5.2 on a 486, and 6.2 on a P1. Mostly, text mode, with a
CGA or the older and less voracious GUI, with 1 MB RAM video cards. The
BBS's ran happy with it, and I even did ftp and http
30 matches
Mail list logo
