On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 08:15:03AM +0100, Peter Von Kaehne wrote:
In essence, if the module is of the kind as this one - ancient
and clearly with problems, chances are that the module needs to
be recreated from scratch anyway. Find a decent source and
produce a replacement. This time with the
Although, the original message was IMHO completely trollish, there is
one thing, where I would like to get a clarification.
On Sun, 2014-02-23 at 22:21 -0800, Chris Little wrote:
We're not an OSIS document repository. Making XML documents available
for that content that we could share is not
On Mon, 2014-02-24 at 17:38 +0100, Matěj Cepl wrote:
removed (I am going to resend here the message I sent to David couple of
weeks ago for which I have never received a reply). I would like to
Actually, it has been sent here as well …
Title: signature
I understand the desire to have a
repository for Scripture source files that are freely
redistributable (i.e. public domain, Creative Commons, or
similar). I operate the beginnings of one at
https://Bible.cx/Scriptures/, and welcome additions. I
On Mon, 2014-02-24 at 17:38 +0100, Matěj Cepl wrote:
Although, the original message was IMHO completely trollish, there is
one thing, where I would like to get a clarification.
On Sun, 2014-02-23 at 22:21 -0800, Chris Little wrote:
We're not an OSIS document repository. Making XML documents
On Mon, 2014-02-24 at 20:16 +, Peter von Kaehne wrote:
I think the basic decision to not publish OSIS for texts we do not
maintain is sound. I have disagreed with it in the past, but once I
realised the Chinese whisper like deterioration of texts by project
copying from project copying
To confirm what others have said: CrossWire has historically held the
position that we are not the keepers of any authoritative source
documents. There are a number of reasons for this, many have been
stated already in this thread: we are primarily a software development
project, other
On Mon, 2014-02-24 at 16:49 -0700, Troy A. Griffitts wrote:
We DO MAINTAIN a link to the source where we obtained the material;
anyone wishing to use the data from one of our SWORD modules SHOULD
INSTEAD simply look at the source link in the module .conf file and use
that source instead.
Von: Matěj Cepl mc...@redhat.com
On Mon, 2014-02-24 at 16:49 -0700, Troy A. Griffitts wrote:
We DO MAINTAIN a link to the source where we obtained the material;
anyone wishing to use the data from one of our SWORD modules SHOULD
INSTEAD simply look at the source link in the module
