On 11/08/2010 08:51 PM, Nic Carter wrote:
> the good thing about it is that we can make one promote the various
> front-ends and the other can promote dev/module making? However, I
> think we need a better way of switching between the 2 than Mozilla
> do.
A link to the wiki from http://crosswire
On 09/11/2010, at 10:38 AM, Peter von Kaehne wrote:
> So
> we really need consensus at least at the core developers/contributors
> level.
My opinion about all of this is that I like the way Mozilla do this:
mozilla.org is for the community/developers and mozilla.com is for end-users.
Ignore
On Nov 8, 2010, at 6:35 AM, Jonathan Morgan wrote:
> I tend to dislike software that forces me to search in certain ways: whether
> it's "You must select the language before we show you what's available" or
> "You must select the type of book" or "You must select the publisher's
> repository",
DM Smith wrote:
> We still have duplication. I think we should remove the duplicates,
> retaining the copy in the wiki. Also, the wiki needs to be more
> prominent for developers to find.
True
> Regarding the FAQ. It was felt that the FAQ would be maintained on
> the wiki with a static copy in t
Late comment to the thread:
Recently, there were two efforts to cleanup the website. Both, IMHO, were good
as far as they went.
These two related to the wiki and the front page of the website. It was agreed
that the front page should face users of CrossWire Bible Software. And that the
wiki wa
On Apr 2, 2010, at 7:57 AM, David Haslam wrote:
>
> This may be seen as a naïve question from someone who has not done enough
> homework
>
> All other books in the Bible are usually called Books in Bible software,
> but Psalms (in some printed editions at least) actually comprises five boo
Hi David,
Just got back from a holiday weekend. Thus the lack of response from me. My
wife, Lisa, and I went to PSU to celebrate 35 years of Alliance Christian
Fellowship, a church that we were part of the founding in 1975 and following.
We also got the privilege of being there when Joe Pa celeb
Xiphos 3.1.4 binaries are now available at
http://sourceforge.net/projects/gnomesword/files/Xiphos/3.1.4/xiphos-3.1.4-win32.exe/download
A few notes for the developer crowd (a more general announcement will
be made later):
Built with SWORD 1.6.2, including the latest utilities
The utilities do n
No response yet! Anyone?
David
--
View this message in context:
http://sword-dev.350566.n4.nabble.com/Psalm-119-stanza-headings-tp3031104p3032724.html
Sent from the SWORD Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
sword-devel mailing list: sword-dev
Several attempts to answer got swallowed by some problem in my
webmail. Now back home a last attempt...
"Troy A. Griffitts" wrote:
> Sure I agree our website needs updating, but a CMS doesn't magically
> update and bring accord to our website.
No. I would agree. But a well thought through plan
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 10:21 PM, David Overcash
wrote:
>> Hm, don't understand, why you want to reinvent the wheel, when WebDAV
>> exists.
>
> To me it seems that it would make mobile development much easier. Then
> again, I have yet to try with WebDAV.
> It's just that WebDAV (in a sense) has al
>
> Hm, don't understand, why you want to reinvent the wheel, when WebDAV
> exists.
>
To me it seems that it would make mobile development much easier. Then
again, I have yet to try with WebDAV.
It's just that WebDAV (in a sense) has already tried to reinvent the wheel -
and all that is necessar
On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Troy A. Griffitts wrote:
> On 11/06/2010 04:36 AM, Nic Carter wrote:
>
>> I initially submitted a patch for HTTP parsing, but it only
>> works for CrossWire and not for the Bible.org nor for the Xiphos
>> repos, and I have no intention of modifying the parsing code
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 4:51 PM, David Overcash wrote:
>>
>> Our current reasons to switch to HTTP is that HTTP is ubiquitous-- often
>> already available at institutions, usually requires no additional
>> training to make something available, and has no firewall/security
>> concerns. I wonder if
On 11/8/2010 5:11 AM, Konstantin Maslyuk wrote:
Sorry me too. Now i almost happy, Thank you.
I don't know reason why emptyvss return no results for RusSynodal but
i know that Ps.114.9 is verse without content. Ps.114.8 should be
broken apart before "Буду ходить пред л..."
This is how o
On 11/8/2010 1:17 AM, Caleb Maclennan wrote:
Chris you mention the issue of balancing devel news / nightly snapshot
type updates and releases that the public aught to be informed about.
I realize this is an issue, but it was pointed out just last week on
this list that the information for diata
On 11/08/2010 09:50 AM, Peter von Kaehne wrote:
> 1) Some of our Genbooks could easily be formatted as a commentary.
> Probably it also should be done and that would remove one reason to look
> somewhere else. But right now the distinction is not totally a sharp
> one. Maybe it would be worthwhile
Developers All,
I have updated the Doxygen documentation available on
http://www.crosswire.org/~ghellings/ to include the 1.6.2 release
versions as well as the latest Subversion as of last night.
I have also created a few little Bash scripts to make updating the
documentation trivial for me. I k
Sure I agree our website needs updating, but a CMS doesn't magically
update and bring accord to our website.
We have had a long and notorious history of complaint about our website.
Someone goes off and reorganizes it the way they think it should be
(about once every 5 years or so) and then we st
On Mon, 08 Nov 2010 07:57:51 -0500
Karl Kleinpaste wrote:
> Jonathan Morgan writes:
> > I tend to dislike software that forces me to search in certain ways:
> > whether it's "You must select the language before we show you what's
> > available" or "You must select the type of book" or "You must
Sorry me too. Now i almost happy, Thank you.
I don't know reason why emptyvss return no results for RusSynodal but
i know that Ps.114.9 is verse without content. Ps.114.8 should be
broken apart before "Буду ходить пред л..."
Chapter titles moved to the end of last verse of previous chapter.
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 11:57 PM, Karl Kleinpaste wrote:
> Jonathan Morgan writes:
>> I tend to dislike software that forces me to search in certain ways:
>> whether it's "You must select the language before we show you what's
>> available" or "You must select the type of book" or "You must select
DM Smith writes:
> InstallSize is also fairly recent and not all confs have it.
All 3 CrossWire repos (regular, beta, experimental) and the Xiphos repo
have InstallSize support.
Whether other publishers put it to use is an unknown.
For CrossWire repos, it's a nightly cron-driven script. All *.
Jonathan Morgan writes:
> I tend to dislike software that forces me to search in certain ways:
> whether it's "You must select the language before we show you what's
> available" or "You must select the type of book" or "You must select
> the publisher's repository", there will be some times when
Both of the XML formats (sblgnt and OSIS) are better than plain text as the
words are already marked up. But of the two, I think the sblgnt XML version
is probably the best format to use for our uses in the Open Scriptures
models. It marks up puncutation in elements (not sure why they're
called "s
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 11:09 PM, DM Smith wrote:
> InstallSize doesn't give the download size. HEAD does. For compressed
> modules and image modules these are fairly close. InstallSize is also fairly
> recent and not all confs have it. So if our software did use it, it'd have
> too fall back to an
InstallSize doesn't give the download size. HEAD does. For compressed modules
and image modules these are fairly close. InstallSize is also fairly recent and
not all confs have it. So if our software did use it, it'd have too fall back
to another way when not there.
Doing HEAD on all the part
Just recall that HEAD presumably takes another roundtrip to the server,
adding latency, while InstallSize just requires you to have the conf files
you have probably already got. (In reality, it's probably not that much of
a problem, but I'm obviously feeling paranoid about latency today ;) ).
Jon
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 6:37 AM, Karl Kleinpaste wrote:
> On the one hand, I appreciate a desire for a combined all-repos view of
> what's available. It would be useful in some ways. On the other hand,
> I find it problematic for several reasons.
>
> - It depends on finding all repos operating.
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 7:48 AM, Greg Hellings wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 8:28 AM, Jonathan Morgan
> wrote:
> > A lot here depends on evaluation of pros and cons. I personally support
> > HTTP, zipped modules, and one central file (like mods.d.tar.gz) to give a
> > list of all the books and
All,
My first impression, albeit a few years ago, was the same thing. I found it
particularly hard to find my way around things. By chance I managed to
stumble across the Jira instance, but then lost it again when I was wanting
to see how much activity was happening. So whether a CMS or some other
Troy and Chris et all,
I cannot speak for what David felt as the exact problem, but I can
tell you why I jumped in with a comment. Troy it's hard to come up
with a specific example because the problem might be best described as
general discombobulation. The main crosswire site and the sword sub
si
32 matches
Mail list logo
