Thanks Troy,
Then perhaps you can explain why this happens (not just once, but several
times)?
- I started a thread in sword-devel.
- As a member of this list I should immediately receive a copy of my own email.
- I didn't.
Best regards,
David
Sent with [Proton Mail](https://proton.me/mail/home) secure email.
On Thursday, February 20th, 2025 at 4:53 PM, Troy A. Griffitts
<scribe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi David. I don't think it's the CrossWire server. I get your email and some
> people get your emails. I believe it is probably mail servers who ban
> CrossWire or protonmail or some other aspect of the mail route you use. If
> any user gets your mail then CrossWire accepted it and forwarded it to the
> recipients. I am sorry for the trouble.
>
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2025, 17:09 David Haslam <dfh...@protonmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Troy,
>>
>> One of the reasons I began use my Proton Mail account for the various
>> CrossWire mailing lists was because the CrossWire mail server was dumping
>> everything from any btinternet.com address into the SPAM dump!
>>
>> I think the server setup needs a thorough vetting to stop it rubbishing
>> genuine participants' email messages!
>>
>> How is it that it's always me that hits these problems?
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> David
>>
>> Sent with [Proton Mail](https://proton.me/mail/home) secure email.
>>
>> On Thursday, February 20th, 2025 at 3:41 PM, Karl Kleinpaste
>> <k...@kleinpaste.org> wrote:
>>
>>> David Haslam [<dfh...@protonmail.com>](mailto:dfh...@protonmail.com) wrote:
>>>
>>>>> My initial message in this thread was sent to sword-devel.
>>>>> Other than Michael & Karl, did anyone else receive it?
>>>
>>> For reasons I don't care to guess, I haven't seen David's emails in
>>> sword-devel in a very long time -- years. I see his comments only in quoted
>>> replies by others. I think something's spam filter is overworked.
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, February 18th, 2025 at 8:49 PM, Michael Johnson
>>> [<kahunap...@ebible.org>](mailto:kahunap...@ebible.org) wrote:
>>>
>>>> I got this, but I'm in time triage mode, and this is not an issue that I
>>>> can reasonably fix. Indeed, if anything, I should keep things as they are
>>>> so that front end designers don't get the idea that version abbreviations
>>>> are unique to just one module. Even being unique to a language is iffy if
>>>> the module has different sources. I can't fix bad front end design.
>>>
>>> It is not "bad front end design" to say that when the user asks for KJV, he
>>> should get KJV, not an nth level derivative instance from a tertiary source.
>>> Sword Project apps have one "native" KJV. If the user doesn't want to
>>> install that, instead installs another, and wants to refer to that using a
>>> convenient abbreviation as KJV, that's fine. But whenever the module whose
>>> .conf says "[KJV]" is installed, the other with an abbreviation loses being
>>> distinguished by the name "KJV".
>>> Since modules' native names don't conflict by definition (i.e. [Name] must
>>> be unique across mods.d/*.conf¹), then nothing else can advertise itself as
>>> the (real, for Sword Project purposes) KJV.
>>> Xiphos' abbreviation support is not nearly as good as it needs to be. For
>>> starters, it needs conflict resolution, and that begins with tossing away
>>> abbreviations that collide with any installed module's native [Name].
>>>
>>> And what to do when 2+ modules have the same Abbreviation=?
>>>
>>> --karl
>>>
>>> ¹ Verify with grep '^\[' .sword/mods.d/*.conf | cut -f2 -d: | sort | uniq
>>> -c | grep -v ' 1 '
_______________________________________________
sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org
http://crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
