Bravo Bill! I agree 100%. Bobby/N4AU
From: Bill Somerville Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2019 11:53 AM To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Someone released an Auto CQ mod - my 2 cents On 31/03/2019 17:12, Carey Fisher wrote: All I have to say, and I've been saying for some time now, is that maybe developers will now think twice before releasing software such as this as Open Source. Carey, that shows a major misunderstanding of both Open Source software and the complexity of WSJT-X. WSJT-X uses two major components provided by third-party teams that are themselves Open Source. There are no other free equivalent components of sufficient quality and scope and writing our own would take many man-years of effort and ongoing maintenance. These components give us an essential leg up to providing a portable cross-platform application of the highest quality with reasonable development timescales. There are reasons why many closed source applications are Windows only and these factors are high on the list. Aside from that, of the latest two "robot" offerings being touted, one does not require any changes to WSJT-X source code and the other is being offered as a contribution with the contentious robotic parts removed. Either way the WSJT team have no interest in WSJT-X being used as a QSO robot and the automation that has been provided already is only in response to large scale user demand. For example auto-sequencing and "Call 1st" were deemed necessary for FT8 because the small thinking time between decodes completing and the next transmission period requires super-human concentration and reaction times. For QSO modes like FT8 we have a basic user interface rule that each QSO must be initiated by some operator action, e.g. calling CQ or replying to a CQ. At the end of a QSO for normal DX contacts the user has the final say on whether a completed QSO is logged, WSJT-X will prompt the user to log a QSO but they must take further action to confirm a good contact or reject a bad one. There are other operator aids for high QSO rate situations, like contest operating and running a rare and popular DX operation, related to logging QSOs but the requirement for an operator action to initiate each QSO is always maintained. What is worth noting is that the small WSJT development team expends a lot of thought and time on how to combat rogue patched versions and add-on tools that attempt to exceed the levels of automation we deem sufficient. These are either misguided or malicious. This detracts from core development and maintenance and we would rather not have to give up that effort. On a personal note; my opinion on QSO robots, aside from their questionable legality in many countries, is that most Amateur Radio operators would not consider a QSO with a machine to be worthwhile and to find out that they had done so unknowingly would be very annoying. For those that attempt to deploy such robots, I suggest they go a step further and dispense with the radio equipment and use their PC skills to mock up the certificates and awards and print them directly, that way no one else is being disappointed and they can save themselves a whole lot of cost and time building, operating, and maintaining an Amateur Radio station. 73 Bill G4WJS. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
_______________________________________________ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
