I believe there are a lot of important things missing from Sword that
should be addressed before we move to 1.6.0. I feel they are
sufficiently important that we should address them immediately rather
than waiting some number of years until we start working on 1.7. And
they will require signific
> I get the impression that our users and front end authors would
> appreciate a 1.5.3 release to be sooner rather than later, in which case
> I think we ought to plan on a 1.5.4 release.
This is correct. We'd appreciate smaller and more frequent releases, which
could be done by implementing s
> > 2) general book support
>
> Should probably wait to 1.5.5 or later, too big a change.
> Requires a lot of work in the frontends.
Support in the API doesn't necessitate support in the frontends. I know
BibleCS is going to require a serious rewrite, probably using the
prototype as a model.
On Sat, 22 Dec 2001 16:39:03 -0800 "Chris Little" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
I have also added a wish list at the end.
> I get the impression that our users and front end authors would
> appreciate a 1.5.3 release to be sooner rather than later,
I agree. There are some nice changes that have
I'd agree with Martin. Any new features should go in 1.5.4 unless there is any
particualr reason Are there any important bugs or anything that need worked on
before 1.5.3 can be released? or is it ready at least for a 'beta' release for a few
weeks before a final release? (time to check for bu
