On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 2:27 AM Neil Zampella <ne...@techie.com> wrote:
> The only reason you'd add RTTY to WSJT-X is if there were some way to > improve it for weak signal work, the program and its protocols were not > designed for any other reason. > And to make contest operation more convenient. > The other reason is one you overlooked in Dave's post: > > Quote: > > 3. Each candidate development task has an "opportunity cost". The time spent > extending WSJT-X to support RTTY is time that can't be spent improving WSJT-X > in other dimensions. The WSJT-X developers are in a unique position to > improve their product; there are many other developers who can further > improve RTTY applications. David and Alex continue to improved their > applications, and MMTTY is open source. > > Thus I strongly recommend that the WSJT-X team continue to apply that > all-too-rare skill among software developers: focus. > > Unquote. > > Neil, KN3ILZ > > > > I didn't overlook it. In that post, I was responding to the strawman argument offered. I have addressed the other point in another post. 73, Frank KF6E
_______________________________________________ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
