Log4OM

Hi Terry & Team

I have been using LOG4OM since getting QRV again last August and I'm very happy with it.

One small item: In settings, QSL defaults, in the sent / received boxes there is no option to leave them blank. This is only possible in the "QSL sent via" setting. Please can you add the option to leave all of these fields blank?

In the case of the LOTW and eQSL sent fields, when the user chooses to upload every QSO automatically I think these will get updated automatically as happens with the associated sent dates? If not, then the settings could be linked so that if the auto-upload option is enabled these fields auto-populate with Y.

As small point, but would certainly be useful to me and probably others.

73 de Tony YO3IPR / G4IPR

Hi Tony, a default value is required on those fields for log4om procedures.
By the way you can choose to automatically upload QSO to EQSL at runtime or leave this process for a cumulative upload once a week or so.

I can link those defaults to Log4OM upload settings, but those settings can be not correctly interpreted.
If you're running with laptop, offline, i will not set those data correctly for upload, once you import the log at home.

Also those fields are populated automatically (if missing and not set) when importing an ADIF file from other softwares.

73 Daniele

Hi Danielle

Thanks for your answer. I did not see it right away as the email notification was not enabled here.

I already have automatic upload to HRDLog, eQSL, Clublog and HamQTH. LOTW needs manually upload. I would prefer the paper QSL status which gets uploaded to HRDLog.net to be blank, but instead I have set it to Queued.

I understand that it is not possible to have blanks in these fields by default. However, they can be set blank in "update QSO", this is why I queried it.

It is true that my logs are always working on-line (no portable operation) and I am not importing logs from other software so perhaps I did not consider all situations.

73 de Tony YO3IPR / G4IPR

Hi Tony, unfortunately at this time all functions based on those fields "expect" a value for those fields, or will drive to possible incorrect behaviours.
In a future i will dedicate some time to check all functions on those fields, but don't expect that soon