Am Thu, 21 May 2020 07:19:00 -0500
schrieb Nate Bargmann :
> What's the thinking on this? I'd like to simplify the code page and
> the man page, if possible.
>
> 73, Nate
>
Hi Nate,
thanks you brought it on the table again.
The last comments from Fred DH5FS questioned the use of the
What's the thinking on this? I'd like to simplify the code page and the
man page, if possible.
73, Nate
--
"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all
possible worlds. The pessimist fears this is true."
Web: https://www.n0nb.us
Projects: https://github.com/N0NB
GPG fingerprint:
* On 2020 12 Jan 16:17 -0600, Fred Siegmund wrote:
> I use it for the german XMAS contest. As this is a sprint, where you have to
> leave QRG after CQ, I don't like ESM (and changing between CQ and S all
> the time).
Hi Fred.
Do you use the + and Insert keys? Their mapping was reversed from CT
I use it for the german XMAS contest. As this is a sprint, where you
have to leave QRG after CQ, I don't like ESM (and changing between CQ
and S all the time).
73 Fred
Am 12.01.20 um 19:48 schrieb Thomas Beierlein:
Hi Nate and Zoli,
in last days I checked the mailing list archive and my
Hi Nate and Zoli,
in last days I checked the mailing list archive and my personal
remarks. As far as I found Nate you were the first one to ask about
the CT mode compatibility in last 5 years.
So it seems that there is not so much interest in it.
From my point of view I am open for removal.
Hi Nate,
Personally I always use the default TLF mode and quite happy with it.
Removing CT compatibility is fine with me.
I didn't quite get the difference between the current and the optional new mode,
though. (I'm not a regular N1MM user)
73,
Zoli
On Tue, Jan 07, 2020 at 08:27:55PM -0600,
I recently did a bit of fixup to the CT compatible mode but I find that
its original choice of keystrokes to not be optimal. As I added support
for some keys used in N1MM+ when ESM is disabled, the code became even
more convoluted and opaque.
I realized that CT compatible mode had been broken
