Re: [sword-devel] How broadly do we define "API" (was: Re: which engine sources to use )

On Jun 9, 2009, at 22:51, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote: 2009/6/10 Greg Hellings : I know the question has been raised before about separating utilities from the library but nothing has ever shaken out of it. To me, this again makes sense in this category. If the utilities were placed int

Re: [sword-devel] How broadly do we define "API" (was: Re: which engine sources to use )

On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 1:51 PM, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote: > Keep the same svn. With a little bit of auto-foo magic you can > generate two different tarballs and release either of them at their > respective schedules. > > IMHO this should be at least done for the bindings. Because python > bindings

Re: [sword-devel] How broadly do we define "API" (was: Re: which engine sources to use )

2009/6/10 Greg Hellings : > > I know the question has been raised before about separating utilities > from the library but nothing has ever shaken out of it.  To me, this > again makes sense in this category.  If the utilities were placed into > their own SVN repository they could easily be release

Re: [sword-devel] How broadly do we define "API" (was: Re: which engine sources to use )

On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 8:59 PM, Jonathan Marsden wrote: > Troy A. Griffitts wrote: > >> 1.6.x has been dubbed a non-API-breaking/binary-compat stable branch. If >> you want to call that a bug-fix branch, great.  We are in a phase of >> development currently which doesn't require a branch.  We are f

Re: [sword-devel] How broadly do we define "API"

Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote: 2009/6/10 Jonathan Marsden : At the level of utilities that are used in scripts, and whose command line parameters are therefore in some sense an "API" for those who write scripts using them, the very recent (post 1.6.0) change to osis2mod that adds the -d option *alrea

Re: [sword-devel] How broadly do we define "API" (was: Re: which engine sources to use )

2009/6/10 Jonathan Marsden : > > At the level of utilities that are used in scripts, and whose command > line parameters are therefore in some sense an "API" for those who write > scripts using them, the very recent (post 1.6.0) change to osis2mod that > adds the -d option *already* broke "osis2mod

[sword-devel] How broadly do we define "API" (was: Re: which engine sources to use )

Troy A. Griffitts wrote: > 1.6.x has been dubbed a non-API-breaking/binary-compat stable branch. If > you want to call that a bug-fix branch, great. We are in a phase of > development currently which doesn't require a branch. We are fixing > bugs, optimizing, and improving filter support, etc.

Re: [sword-devel] A Theological Question

Alright, that clears up that bit about the element. When I saw on p. 65, I thought that might encompass other types as well. What about this solution: . . . Father and of the type="person" regular="Jesus Christ">Son and of the type="nonhuman">Holy Spirit . . . > Note that the attribute reg

Re: [sword-devel] SWORD handling of OSIS paragraphs

Ben Morgan wrote: On 07/06/2009, *Chris Little* > wrote: The *htmlhref filters are the GnomeSword filters. They may now be used by other front ends, and the GnomeSword/Xiphos team may have abandoned their maintenance, but they were originally written

Re: [sword-devel] which engine sources to use

1.6.x has been dubbed a non-API-breaking/binary-compat stable branch. If you want to call that a bug-fix branch, great. We are in a phase of development currently which doesn't require a branch. We are fixing bugs, optimizing, and improving filter support, etc. These are all things which wil

Re: [sword-devel] Mac Build of BibleTime 2.0.1

Hi Greg. Modules are detected but views are still a bit strange, I guess you know. I think icons are too large and parallel bible views are actually windows and out of sync. Regards, Manfred Am 09.06.2009 um 14:52 schrieb Greg Hellings: I have posted a build of BibleTime 2.0.1 with Qt 4

Re: [sword-devel] A Theological Question

Ted Janiszewski wrote: Here's a question not entirely clear in the current OSIS manual that has been bothering me: Given the use of , , and elements, how should one mark up Matthew 28:16? Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of

Re: [sword-devel] A Theological Question

Ted Janiszewski wrote: > Given the use of , , and > elements, how should one mark up Matthew 28:16? > > Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in > the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit . . . 2 aspects: 1) divineName is AFAIK only used whe

[sword-devel] Mac Build of BibleTime 2.0.1

I have posted a build of BibleTime 2.0.1 with Qt 4.4.1 and SWORD 1.6.0 to http://www.crosswire.org/~ghellings/bibletime for Macintosh. This build will, hopefully, answer some of the outstanding questions that had been experienced with previous builds of BibleTime for Mac against 1.5.11 of SWORD.

[sword-devel] A Theological Question

Here's a question not entirely clear in the current OSIS manual that has been bothering me: Given the use of , , and elements, how should one mark up Matthew 28:16? Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name > of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit .

Re: [sword-devel] which engine sources to use

Manfred Bergmann wrote: > Now that 1.6.0 is out I'd like to know what you propose to use as source. > Until now I have sticked to the Subversion trunk HEAD but since new > development is probably going on there this might not be the best idea > to always have a stable version. > Will there be a 1.

[sword-devel] which engine sources to use

Hi. Now that 1.6.0 is out I'd like to know what you propose to use as source. Until now I have sticked to the Subversion trunk HEAD but since new development is probably going on there this might not be the best idea to always have a stable version. Will there be a 1.6 branch that can be us