DM Smith wrote: > Again the reason we don't have such a repository is because we don't > want to become a secondary repository of primary works. We'd need to > figure out how to work around that.
Part of my desire for a module source repository has been addressed by the apparent acceptance for a round trip with improvement for a module. In the past when I reported problems (UTF8 encoding, verse separation etc) I was stopped from simply doing a round trip and do the change, but it appears that this is now accepted. I was told we would need to recreate the module from source. Now I am capable of doing the first, but the second is often beyond me. I guess others are in the same position. In consequence we had often for a fair while modules with serious problems in the main repository. Can I assume that the round-trip with improvement is now accepted practice? _______________________________________________ sword-devel mailing list: [email protected] http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
