<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
Kenwood support was always a big issue with any changes. Another big
philosophical debate (the one that had Bob and I blowing up the SIG
for a week straight and getting nothing productive done at our
respective government jobs) was over who got to decide what types of
traffic were permissible on network infrastructure and whose
responsibility it was to ensure (for example) that proper PID
parsing was used. I don't think the question was ever meaningfully
resolved, but Bob and I were at least able to have a beer together
and laugh about it at the next DCC.<br>
<br>
I'd be happy to resurrect OpenTRAC if there's still a role for it to
play, or to pass the torch to someone who wants to take the lead.
There are things in there that I'd do differently now, and plenty of
my original vision that was never realized, but it's not bad
compared to a whole lot of legacy stuff we're stuck with. (I say as
I'm taking a break from working on a <i>de novo</i> EchoLink
implementation and questioning my life choices.)<br>
<br>
Scott<br>
N1VG<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 8/16/2023 5:55 PM, Gregg Wonderly
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:174AF916-D66F-40D2-96CA-C5F901690F47@wonderly.org">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">What happened is that Bob Bruninga came out pretty strongly against OpenTrac because of the Kenwood support in radios and software that already existed. The friction and conflict in discussion pretty much became a good enough barrier to progress that public discussion disappeared/stopped.
With M-17 rolling out, and its ability to provide an out of band digital data stream, OpenTrac would be a good fit for adding structured data into the transmissions there.
Gregg Wondetly
W5GGW
Sent from my iPhone
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">On Aug 13, 2023, at 3:33 PM, wa7skg <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:wa7skg@wa7skg.com"><wa7skg@wa7skg.com></a> wrote:
I'd be concerned that nothing appears to have been done with OpenTrac in almost 20 years. Technology moves a lot faster than that. Pretty much everything that OpenTrac originally addressed has long since been incorporated into modern APRS clients and protocols.
I'd be interested to see what applications currently are supporting 20 year old software.
Michael WA7SKG
Gregg Wonderly wrote on 8/13/23 10:11 AM:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">We really need to open the door to investigation of OpenTrac. It provides some much more consumable structure that avoids the append this string in this format “design” principals that make APRS difficult to create parsers for.
You’ll find OpenTrac (<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://opentrac.org/">http://opentrac.org/</a>) support already in some popular trackers!
Gregg Wonderly
W5GGW
Sent from my iPhone
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
_______________________________________________
aprssig mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:aprssig@lists.tapr.org">aprssig@lists.tapr.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig_lists.tapr.org">http://lists.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig_lists.tapr.org</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
_______________________________________________
aprssig mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:aprssig@lists.tapr.org">aprssig@lists.tapr.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig_lists.tapr.org">http://lists.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig_lists.tapr.org</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>