Dear all,
I would like to propose this release candidate for the next revision of
Bishop. Please report any final problems you might find before release.
http://crosswire.org/~scribe/bishop-1.3.904.apk
bishop-1.3.904.apk size: 9281797 md5: 119e1e4c42fef92d9635a803d0ba1fe5
All locale updates
I have submitted a PR that removes the NASHebrew/NASGreek handling code in
Xiphos. With it applied, clicking on Strong's numbers now works as expected.
Fedora packages with the applied patch are building now and will be ready
shortly. Any other packagers wishing to include this fix ASAP can fetch
Thanks Karl. All working as it should.
Regards, Gary
On Thu, 2020-04-02 at 17:49 -0400, Karl Kleinpaste wrote:
> On 4/2/20 4:40 PM, G Bennett wrote:
> > I generally use two modules that contain Strong's numbers - the
> > ESV2011
> > and NASB. The ESV2011 works correctly, but the NASB doesn't.
>
On 4/2/20 4:40 PM, G Bennett wrote:
I generally use two modules that contain Strong's numbers - the ESV2011
and NASB. The ESV2011 works correctly, but the NASB doesn't.
Oh...well, um...crap.
/sigh
/Bother, said Pooh.
See, once upon a midnight dreary, lo these ages ago, in the Before
Times,
Both Bible modules work correctly in PocketSword in regard to the display of
Strong’s lookup with an installed dictionary module.
NB. I have StrongsRealGreek and StringsRealHebrew modules installed from the
Xiphos repository.
Maybe there’s an issue for the StrongsGreek and/or StrongsHebrew
Hello,
I'm using Xiphos on Void Linux under Flatpak and have an issue with the
recently-released unlocked NASB module. I don't know if the issue is a
user, Xiphos or a module issue so need some guidance please.
I generally use two modules that contain Strong's numbers - the ESV2011
and NASB. The
Hello,
I'm using Xiphos on Void Linux under Flatpak and have an issue with the
recently-released unlocked NASB module. I don't know if the issue is a
user, Xiphos or a module issue so need some guidance please.
I generally use two modules that contain Strong's numbers - the ESV2011
and NASB. The
On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 10:04 PM Troy A. Griffitts
wrote:
> Our Gitlab instance is available for any official CrossWire projects who
> wish to use it. We don't have the resources to manage open subscriptions
> but any CrossWire project wishing to make our gitlab their home is welcome
> to an
Hi Troy,
I don't understand why we leave bishop on the private git. Why not just
put it on the normal gitlab, and everyone invests freely, free to you
after to merge or not, the merge requests.
It's really not easy for the moment without access to git.crosswire. I
think it's counterproductive.
Hi Troy,
Is there any update on this subject?
It would be good to have clarity here.
Best regards,
Tobias
From: Caleb Maclennan
Sent: Samstag, 22. Februar 2020 08:08
To: SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum
Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Next Sword release - timeline?
>From the downstream distro
10 matches
Mail list logo
