On Mon, 2014-02-24 at 20:16 +0000, 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 from project my views changed.
I think you confuse two things (freely modifiable texts and assurance of the code consistency … for the latter we have versioning control systems, code review, canonical repositories, etc.; programmers don't like random changes in their source code any more than the Biblical scholars do), but that's not the point. Exactly for this purpose I said "source code repository OR available maintainers". > The plan is there, the idea is approved, the git stuff is up, what is > missing are the scripts and the overall glue. Can I help somehow? Best, Matěj -- http://www.ceplovi.cz/matej/, Jabber: mc...@ceplovi.cz GPG Finger: 89EF 4BC6 288A BF43 1BAB 25C3 E09F EF25 D964 84AC The difference between death and taxes is death doesn't get worse every time Congress meets -- Will Rogers
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ 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
