Re: [sword-devel] NASB status

Greg's Version=0.1.7 SwordVersionDate=2014-04-02 That's the latest version in his private repository. David -- View this message in context: http://sword-dev.350566.n4.nabble.com/NASB-status-tp4655601p4655658.html Sent from the SWORD Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: [sword-devel] NASB status

It is available as the nightly build at: www.crosswire.org/bibledesktop/download.html . (It’s not nightly.) Don’t remember when I made it available. May have been in the spring. Updated it just the other day. The Mac package is hurting. Use

Re: [sword-devel] NASB status

: Donnerstag, 07. Januar 2016 um 13:15 Uhr Von: "DM Smith" <dmsm...@crosswire.org> An: "SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum" <sword-devel@crosswire.org> Betreff: Re: [sword-devel] NASB status I really don’t want to encourage the flames.   I was asked to modify the

Re: [sword-devel] NASB status

Which edition are you referencing? At this time Greg’s is the only one under discussion. I don’t know whether he used Troy’s or my version of the C++ code, but he had access to both. When I passed my work off to him, the x-values were largely removed. There were only 2 x-superiorComma and

Re: [sword-devel] NASB status

This is an aside, but only one step off the path: Have we considered that the NASB has a major revision due out this year? Lockman won't publicly predict a date, but another group I watch has members with first hand knowledge and suggest there will be a NASB 2016 revision, which will supercede

Re: [sword-devel] NASB status

I also have in my mind that the Hebrew and Greek lexicons Lockman includes with the NASB still had some processing to complete, is that right? On January 6, 2016 7:55:57 AM MST, Greg Hellings wrote: >The software requirement was JSword support - I forget which feature

Re: [sword-devel] NASB status

On 01/06/2016 10:22 AM, Peter Von Kaehne wrote: > I much rather would deal on the support line with complaints about NASB not > working well on whatever than it still not available. I could try to express how much in agreement I am with this sentence but I cannot succeed. Make it available,

Re: [sword-devel] NASB status

They are still in exact the same status they were handed to me. I haven't touched the lexica at all, I believe. They have vaguely been said to have "issues", but no one has told me what those issues are, and I haven't bothered to comb through for the issues they might have. --Greg On Wed, Jan 6,

Re: [sword-devel] NASB status

The software requirement was JSword support - I forget which feature it was that was needed, but Troy didn't want to proceed until JSword/BibleDestktop fully supported the features. --Greg On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 8:53 AM, Karl Kleinpaste wrote: > NASB has been a decade-plus

[sword-devel] NASB status

NASB has been a decade-plus in progress. Last I knew or remembered, Greg's markup had gotten quite solid and, I believe, finalized. There was something going on about necessary engine support percolating out to one or more of the frontends before NASB would be considered for release. Where do

Re: [sword-devel] NASB status

That makes little sense. Many a time only attractive modules available have changed the glacial speed by which some frontends improve. I much rather would deal on the support line with complaints about NASB not working well on whatever than it still not available. Peter > Von: "Greg

Re: [sword-devel] NASB status

llaboration Forum" <sword-devel@crosswire.org> Betreff: Re: [sword-devel] NASB status I also have in my mind that the Hebrew and Greek lexicons Lockman includes with the NASB still had some processing to complete, is that right?   On January 6, 2016 7:55:57 AM MST, Greg Hellings <greg.helli..

Re: [sword-devel] NASB status

I don't want to fight about this yet again. This is a commercial module to be sold by Lockman. That is a different scenario from other modules. For this module, I have reasonably asked: 1) That we have a scripted, reproducible way to transform their data from their pristine source to a

Re: [sword-devel] NASB status

On Jan 6, 2016 12:53 PM, "Troy A. Griffitts" wrote: > > I don't want to fight about this yet again. > > This is a commercial module to be sold by Lockman. That is a different > scenario from other modules. For this module, I have reasonably asked: > > 1) That we have a

Re: [sword-devel] NASB status

On 01/06/2016 10:56 AM, Greg Hellings wrote: > but no one has told me what those issues are It comes down to this: We need to look for the way to say Yes, and stop coughing up any and all possible, weak, ham-handed excuses to say No. A long time ago -- late '08 -- I flamed at length here about

Re: [sword-devel] NASB status

Greg already has the aforesaid "David" in the NASB module testing loop. :) "David" got to see the bugs before the module is released. Notwithstanding, it's "a year and a day" since my last email to Greg on the NASB. Isn't there a rule about that? David -- View this message in context:

Re: [sword-devel] NASB status

The Sword Project has done some pretty awesome things in open source Bible study software over the years. Taking more than 12 years to release a NASB module in any form is not one of them. 1) Yeah, it is a duplication of effort, but I have a scripted

Re: [sword-devel] NASB status

I hesitate to even respond to this thread, as none of this kicks the can down the road, but... I believe some of the issue has to do with typical open source volunteer problems. Specifically, in this case, none of the pumpkin holders was satisfied to build on their predecessors' code. I

Re: [sword-devel] NASB status

On 2016-01-06, 22:04 GMT, Troy A. Griffitts wrote: > I hesitate to even respond to this thread, as none of this > kicks the can down the road, but... I agree. Besides, I really do not believe Lockman Foundation expects anything at this point. They would have to have supernatural gift of

Re: [sword-devel] NASB status

On 2016-01-06, 18:53 GMT, Troy A. Griffitts wrote: > This is a commercial module to be sold by Lockman. That is > a different scenario from other modules. For this module, > I have reasonably asked: I didn’t like Karl’s tone last time the flamewar went around, but I have to admit he is