Greg Hellings wrote:
If not 1.6 or 2.0... then could you possibly explain to me the rhyme or reason given to the versioning system?
The minor version indicates whether we're in a development (odd number) or stable (even number) branch. Under that system, 1.6 and 2.0 wouldn't be right for this change. We could think about bumping to 1.7 though. I'll confess, I consider the v11n change to be evolutionary, not revolutionary, so I wouldn't expect a greater than usual version bump--but version numbering really isn't the sort of thing I think or care about.
I should mention that we're not considering a free-for-all here, where module developers get to implement their own v11n systems. We're also not talking about GenBook Bibles.
Troy wants us to identify and define a small set of v11n systems that give us the greatest bang for the buck, and module developers will have to select from one of those predefined systems (at least in 1.5.12). So, in addition to KJV, I'd like us to define a few important original language systems (probably Leningrad Codex, Vulgate, and LXXM) and a few broadly used translation v11n systems like NRSV/NRSVA (the OSIS standard) and maybe the French standard. We can support more in later releases.
--Chris _______________________________________________ sword-devel mailing list: [email protected] http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
