On 11/05/2010 09:34 AM, Peter von Kaehne wrote:
Von: Jonathan Morgan<jonmmor...@gmail.com>
(though I'm not convinced that a large percentage has these tools at their
disposable or is aware of them).
At which point that particular debate probably ends :-)
While drag and drop installation has a certain coolness factor, I feel
having a menu option (like the "File> Install Books" BPBible has, also
including multiple book installation) is more discoverable and thus
perhaps
more useful to the starting off user.
No objection, but also no contradiction.
Also, people coming from the
background of e-Sword or similar tools are probably used to seeing a large
collection of books on a web page to download, and when they see a similar
list at Crosswire they do the same: download books and look for a way to
install them, while some people just like downloading a thing to make sure
they have it and could it share it with others if they wanted to (though
with "the cloud" this is probably less common than it used to be).
I think the huge number of support emails "I have downloaded x number of modules and
now what am I supposed to do" suggests the same - though of course us taking away
the zips from the webpage would be a helpful step to stop that.
We should at least drop the MacOSX ones. And perhaps the Windows ones.
If someone has installed Xiphos or Bible Desktop, but never has
installed BibleCS, then these don't work. They also don't work on 64-bit
(according to reports).
IIRC: Troy said these were there to satisfy a publisher's request that
some info from a module's conf be shown for modules installed this way.
It only ever worked in BibleCS. Is that still a valid concern?
Downloading a zip for sharing is of course a very useful way to pass about
modules via sneaker net. And that is in turn a way of some importance where the
interent is either sparse or controlled. I think we acknowledge this by making
the zip's available but we do not exactly facilitate it beyond that point. And
that is a shame.
I think every frontend should be able to browse, at least locally, for a
"raw" zip and install it. That way the downloads from the web page
become less of a support question.
On a different note, I think it might be good to have multiple install
locations, one for each repository. Today, we have a KJV, but if this
gets going I could see a publisher with their own repository having a
KJV. JSword *had* a mechanism to allow for duplicates such as these by
disambiguating them by their repository name, e.g.
KJV (CrossWire)
We pulled it because it didn't happen in reality and because it was not
implemented very well.
In this situation, zips are anonymous and would go in a "private"
repository.
Today, JSword allow for multiple repository locations, but only one for
install. I use my own private repository for modules I have created so
that I don't accidentally wack them.
DM
Peter
Jon
_______________________________________________
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
