On 27/02/2018 14:29, Joe Taylor wrote:
you can write "I don't see a problem", and blame the issue on user
ignorance. You can insist the design makes sense, contrary to the
feedback. You can observe talk is cheap, and complain about how few
core contributors you have, and opine cross-platform interfaces are
hard. Having established your audience is lazy, ignorant, and
unappreciative, and the problem (wait, there wasn't a problem?)
technically intractable, you can mask your vitriol with "patches
welcome".
You're right, talk is cheap, code is hard. So tell me, why should I
invest my valuable time helping you?
You want more developer contributions? As you say, it's easy to complain.
Phil,
I have a right to an opinion. I also have a right to express it. It is
called a conversation. Until an implementable patch is contributed as
request for change is no more than an opportunity for someone like me to
spend time trying to implement it within the constraints of the current
implementation, framework and tools. As someone who actually does that
stuff I feel it is important to explain why I think something is not a
good approach. For example in this case the expressed issue is trivial
and the changes being suggested are considerable and disruptive.
Furthermore implied requests like yours to implement a hotkey to
traverse from a label to the entry area (yes you did ask for that
implicitly by quoting the MS design guide-lines as what we should be
doing here even though the Qt UI implementation already has a implict
"buddy" relationship between labels and the widgets they partner
therefore needing nothing more than linking them in the UI designer or
UI construction source code. Either way, labels are optional and I doubt
many if any users misunderstand that the Rx and Tx spin boxes are for
changing audio frequency offsets once they understand the fundamental
principle of using narrow band data modes in the wider containing
sub-band of an SSB transceiver.
WSJT-X gains a great deal of implementation re-use by sharing a common
UI for many modes and protocols, this is a trade off as the UI becomes
much more complicated that is apparent from viewing in any one mode of
operation. It also leads to some clunkiness of rendering due to many
hidden elements and the layout managers that tend to their space
requirements. This is price worth paying in an experimental application
with fundamental design steps being constantly developed. Other
developers are welcome to develop their own UI and applications using
these protocols and if they wish to focus on a sub-set then they can
probably come up with very slick and efficient UIs.
When patches are delivered I am usually more than happy to work with
contributors to get them into shape for acceptance, I suspect that I do
more than any other developer in the WSJT team in that respect, despite
having a day job as well. I developed the current build system for
WSJT-X that allows even the least computer literate user who wish to
dabble with the source code to join the party.
73
Bill
G4WJS.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
wsjt-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
