Daniel Owens wrote:
> 2. The Crosswire repo is a bottleneck. I think Chris needs help to get
> modules through in a timely manner. More people need to be involved at that
> step. PLEASE let's find a way to reduce the turnaround time for module
> publishing. I'm willing to contribute there.
Th
Am 26.11.2008 um 20:40 schrieb Troy A. Griffitts:
> Good suggestion Karl. Others sound like they would also like this.
> May
> I ask first for some feedback regarding current state of TRUNK? I
I've tried the trunk for development of MacSword 2.0 and IIRC I found
several issues which made
Am 27.11.2008 um 00:11 schrieb Jonathan Morgan:
> On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 9:22 AM, Troy A. Griffitts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > wrote:
>>> Isn't this kept in SWVersion.currentVersion? Backward
>>> compatibility is
>>> removed every new SWORD version, I think (not on purpose
>>> necesarily, but
>
Am 26.11.2008 um 23:31 schrieb Greg Hellings:
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 4:27 PM, Chris Little
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Matthew Talbert wrote:
>>> I would just like to point out again that there is very little
>>> transparency in how bugs are updated and fixed in modules. Neither
>>
Greg Hellings wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 4:27 PM, Chris Little <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Matthew Talbert wrote:
>>> I would just like to point out again that there is very little
>>> transparency in how bugs are updated and fixed in modules. Neither
>>> does it appear to happen quick
Praying everyone has a happy thanksgiving, and praying for unity at
the sword project.
Matthew
___
sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org
http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings
Four.
On 11/26/08, Brian J. Dumont <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Peter von Kaehne wrote:
>> Daniel Owens wrote:
>>
>>> This discussion (despite the occasional vitriolic accusation or personal
>>> attack) is really important. There are two issues at stake--one is
>>> technical (and this discussion i
Peter von Kaehne wrote:
> Daniel Owens wrote:
>
>> This discussion (despite the occasional vitriolic accusation or personal
>> attack) is really important. There are two issues at stake--one is technical
>> (and this discussion is producing collaboration on that), but the other is
>> administ
Daniel Owens wrote:
> This discussion (despite the occasional vitriolic accusation or personal
> attack) is really important. There are two issues at stake--one is technical
> (and this discussion is producing collaboration on that), but the other is
> administrative, related to module creation,
This discussion (despite the occasional vitriolic accusation or personal
attack) is really important. There are two issues at stake--one is technical
(and this discussion is producing collaboration on that), but the other is
administrative, related to module creation, and that is my primary conc
Karl Kleinpaste wrote:
> Peter von Kaehne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> And would only be really relevant if these modules were static and
>> never be updated. But they are not static and they do get updated.
>
> Often (usually!) within minutes of being informed of problems.
11 months ago, I
Chris Little wrote:
>
> Karl Kleinpaste wrote:
>> Spare us the "they're not *really* ThML" whining. I don't care that
>> they're specifically ThML. When I first started producing Sword modules
>> 2 years ago, I was using GBF.
>
> The issue is you're too lazy to even run tidy on your HTML.
I g
"Troy A. Griffitts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> May I ask first for some feedback regarding current state of TRUNK?
I sent you a locale-related core-dumping stack trace some weeks ago.
Given that "svn up" just now doesn't give me anything new (I'm at
-r2210), I'm not even testing with Sword tr
On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 9:22 AM, Troy A. Griffitts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Isn't this kept in SWVersion.currentVersion? Backward compatibility is
>> removed every new SWORD version, I think (not on purpose necesarily, but
>> there are always some things to fix.
>
> I don't believe this is tru
> I don't know the filters well, but surely if there is really a need it
> should be possible for frontends to plug their own URL reference
> structure into the filter? Something like: they provide a function
> which takes a key and a module and converts it into a URL. Then the
> passagestudy cou
> The issue is you're too lazy to even run tidy on your HTML.
This is really going way too far.
> take you 10 seconds to run and would give you nice valid XHTML as a
> basis to work from. As it is, you have elements like lying about,
> which are not valid within ThML and will cause problems for
On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 9:27 AM, Ben Morgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here is how I would do it/it should be done:
>
> For internal links in OSIS:
> In:
> Text
> Out (For osishtmlhref):
> href="passagestudy.jsp?action=moduleRef&value=encoded_key&module=module">Text
>
> Vary the passagestudy str
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 4:27 PM, Chris Little <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Matthew Talbert wrote:
>> I would just like to point out again that there is very little
>> transparency in how bugs are updated and fixed in modules. Neither
>> does it appear to happen quickly. For example, someone rep
Here is how I would do it/it should be done:
For internal links in OSIS:
In:
Text
Out (For osishtmlhref):
Text
Vary the passagestudy string according to taste - especially moduleRef
If module == "self", use the current module.
If a link starts with Bible: or has no : in it, the existing referenc
Matthew Talbert wrote:
> I would just like to point out again that there is very little
> transparency in how bugs are updated and fixed in modules. Neither
> does it appear to happen quickly. For example, someone reported a bug
> (several bugs) in the ISBE module to the sword-support list 4 days
Karl Kleinpaste wrote:
> Spare us the "they're not *really* ThML" whining. I don't care that
> they're specifically ThML. When I first started producing Sword modules
> 2 years ago, I was using GBF.
The issue is you're too lazy to even run tidy on your HTML. It might
take you 10 seconds to ru
> Isn't this kept in SWVersion.currentVersion? Backward compatibility is
> removed every new SWORD version, I think (not on purpose necesarily, but
> there are always some things to fix.
I don't believe this is true. Although we add new features, sometimes
changing object sizes-- which may pre
Am 26.11.2008 um 22:10 schrieb Ben Morgan:
> 2) stability: we are missing bounds checks for calls into the new
> VerseMgr, resulting in crashes if you, for example, ask for the max
> chapter of a book which doesn't exist. I think this is the main cause
> for crashes, but it would be nice to get
On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 6:40 AM, Troy A. Griffitts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Good suggestion Karl. Others sound like they would also like this. May
> I ask first for some feedback regarding current state of TRUNK? I
> believe we have a fairly optimized impl of the old functionality running
>
Dear Greg,
Yes, we've had to handle the windows config issue in the past and this
is why config.h is actually committed to the source tree. You can
include config.h in your windows code; otherwise, if you don't want a
code change specifically for windows, it looks like you can define
USE_AUTO
I fully support the soon-release mantra.
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 1:40 PM, Troy A. Griffitts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Good suggestion Karl. Others sound like they would also like this. May
> I ask first for some feedback regarding current state of TRUNK? I
> believe we have a fairly optimize
Good suggestion Karl. Others sound like they would also like this. May
I ask first for some feedback regarding current state of TRUNK? I
believe we have a fairly optimized impl of the old functionality running
in the new paradigm of dyn versification. We might be able to clean it
up by next
"Troy A. Griffitts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So, this is a quick fix and will be in the next rev. If you need it
> before the next rev, you are very welcome to extend the filter and
> catch the tag to handle it correctly.
Just my opinion: I would prefer to see a new, very-near-term release
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 1:48 PM, Peter von Kaehne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matthew Talbert wrote:
>>> General historic policy at CrossWire is: we will not be an authoritative
>>> source repository.
>
> I think there is some misunderstanding which keeps creeping up in this
> kind of discussions.
Matthew Talbert wrote:
>> General historic policy at CrossWire is: we will not be an authoritative
>> source repository.
I think there is some misunderstanding which keeps creeping up in this
kind of discussions.
Yes CrossWire is not a source of texts. But we regularly do create some
kind of impo
> General historic policy at CrossWire is: we will not be an authoritative
> source repository.
Of course, Crosswire does maintain the source to the KJV, the NASB,
and perhaps a few others, correct? I do not wish to argue about it,
but I wonder if the policy still makes sense. If something is in t
I realize a few of you are new around here and we don't really have a
FAQ regarding policies, save the mailing list archive search (found on
the left side of the main http://crosswire.org/sword page). Anyone wish
to start one?
General historic policy at CrossWire is: we will not be an authorit
> To take this a step further, I would like a place where all source files for
> public domain modules can be downloaded and fixed by anyone. If I find a
> typo in the markup of a module, doesn't it make sense for me to fix the file
> (whether it is ThML/OSIS/GBF/whatever) and email it in? Saves
Matthew Talbert wrote:
>> Karl and others already CAN release modules in their own repo and are
>> doing so. It is only proper for the official CrossWire repo to shoot
>> for very high standard-- even if we haven't always met them. If people
>> would just TRY to help us meet them, then we might r
> Karl and others already CAN release modules in their own repo and are
> doing so. It is only proper for the official CrossWire repo to shoot
> for very high standard-- even if we haven't always met them. If people
> would just TRY to help us meet them, then we might release more modules.
> But
OK guys. I'll make this brief.
Stop whining! Everyone!
The SWORD Engine has multiple Remote Repo Install for this very purpose.
I like Karl's repo for all the reasons he mentions: quick new useful
modules.
This is not the modus operandi for the CrossWire Remote Repo. I don't
want to hear a
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 5:11 AM, Eeli Kaikkonen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Quoting Greg Hellings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
>>
>> Likewise. People (I think Chris is one of the leading people, but I
>> might be mistaken on that) ought to stop advocating usage of OSIS
>> references for the time bein
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 10:11 AM, Karl Kleinpaste <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Peter von Kaehne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> And would only be really relevant if these modules were static and
>> never be updated. But they are not static and they do get updated.
>
> Often (usually!) within minute
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 4:15 AM, Peter von Kaehne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Chris Little wrote:
>> then updating the module repeatedly until we
>> finally find a good markup standard, we can get things right the first
>> time
>
>
> That is a totally wrong approach on so many levels. It holds us
lol
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 7:21 AM, Karl Kleinpaste <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Rapid Development: Taming Wild Software Schedules
> Steve McConnell
> $23 @ amazon
>
> ___
> sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org
> http://www.crosswire.org/
Peter von Kaehne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If someone brings us a good text to include, then we should be able to
> say - "here, it works" and then gradualy improve it to make it better,
> richer and more conforming to whatever lofty standards we want to achieve.
That is precisely how my Train
Peter von Kaehne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> And would only be really relevant if these modules were static and
> never be updated. But they are not static and they do get updated.
Often (usually!) within minutes of being informed of problems.
___
sw
Matthew Talbert wrote:
> I would just like to add that some short examples of how to use OSIS
> and TEI for dictionaries would be very helpful. By examples I just
> mean a few entire entries done with different options with comments
> explaining what was going on. Linking to the TEI page doesn't he
Jonathan Morgan wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 1:14 AM, Karl Kleinpaste <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I DO NOT CARE if they meet some standard of perfection. IT DOES NOT
>> MATTER if they validate. IT IS OF NO RELEVANCE that they're not clean.
>
> Unless, of course, they do not work in any fr
"Jonathan Morgan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Unless, of course, they do not work in any frontend at all other than
> Gnomesword.
I have BibleCS. I check my modules in it. They work.
If you see problems, tell me.
___
sword-devel mailing list: sword-
On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 1:14 AM, Karl Kleinpaste <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Spare us the "they're not *really* ThML" whining. I don't care that
> they're specifically ThML. When I first started producing Sword modules
> 2 years ago, I was using GBF.
>
> The only important distinctions about my
Rapid Development: Taming Wild Software Schedules
Steve McConnell
$23 @ amazon
___
sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org
http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
Spare us the "they're not *really* ThML" whining. I don't care that
they're specifically ThML. When I first started producing Sword modules
2 years ago, I was using GBF.
The only important distinctions about my modules are:
- They work.
- They get out readily to people who want them.
- They pro
On Nov 25, 2008, at 11:12 PM, Matthew Talbert wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 11:05 PM, Matthew Talbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > wrote:
>>> Since Chris already answered the second one - OSIS has the
>>> tag
>>> - can we just add the osisRef-to-URI and be done with it? I've
>>> messed
>>> ar
Quoting Greg Hellings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Likewise. People (I think Chris is one of the leading people, but I
> might be mistaken on that) ought to stop advocating usage of OSIS
> references for the time being. They accomplish nothing, since they
> produce nonsense out the other end, being
Chris Little wrote:
> then updating the module repeatedly until we
> finally find a good markup standard, we can get things right the first
> time
That is a totally wrong approach on so many levels. It holds us back all
the time, makes for module production times in years rather than weeks,
dri
2008/11/26 Greg Hellings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I'm building the current SVN on my Mac and have the following issue -
> autogen.sh does not find libtoolize, but the autogen.sh script
> continues anyway, generating a configure script, but no Makefile.in
> because of missing ltmain.sh. Now, with Mac
52 matches
Mail list logo
