On Feb 25, 2014, at 6:10 PM, Stephan Kreutzer skreut...@freiebibel.de wrote:
The original, printed KJV is difficult to pin down. It certainly is not the
1611. That's easy to show. When I started working on it, the claim was that
it was the 1769 edition. I've not been able to find such an
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi, Jonathan!
On 25.02.2014 15:49, Jonathan Morgan wrote:
I've been around CrossWire for quite a few years without actually
being part of the official group, so I think my opinion might be
helpful here as I don't have any turf to defend
Sorry for the top-post-reply, but here it is, so I guess I'm not all that sorry
;)
The main bit of code you are referring to (parsing the HTML) is my code. There
is other code that parses the return from an FTP server, which is ancient code.
My code is (relatively) new, only about 3 years
Quickly, regarding DVCS, the argument to keeping SVN over a DVCS isn't that a
DVCS isn't 'better' in some ways or as Peter has suggested, wouldn't let us
maintain tight review of our code or that we simply don't ever want to change
anything. We eventually switched from CVS to SVN :) The reason
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 07:24:17AM -0700, Troy A. Griffitts wrote:
I installed TortoiseSVN for them. They are HTML designers,
flash programmers, transcription editors, etc. It was a real
https://code.google.com/p/tortoisegit/ ?
http://gitx.frim.nl/ ??
http://git-scm.com/downloads/guis
Also,
On Feb 26, 2014, at 9:24 AM, Troy A. Griffitts scr...@crosswire.org wrote:
Though as an aside, just from a personal query, how do you guys get Windows
and GUI Mac users to use git? I have at least 2 ancillary projects with SVN
repos on CrossWire's server where the users are not programmers,
On the ancillary - if you install git on windows, you get the default
terminal. A lot of people also use Tortoise Git which is the equivalent of
Tortoise SVN and very good. There are some very good (better even) tools
for Mac I'm told. On top of that git is now part of the core Eclipse and
I can fully understand you.
I don't like git as well. Though I use Bazaar for all I'm developing. And yet,
Bazaar is said to be dead or at least not much effort is put into it any
longer. I'm still using it because I don't like git.
People who wish to contribute do contribute which ever VCS or
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 26.02.2014 16:24, Troy A. Griffitts wrote:
Though as an aside, just from a personal query, how do you guys get
Windows and GUI Mac users to use git? I have at least 2 ancillary
projects with SVN repos on CrossWire's server where the users are
I work in an organization with ubuntu, windows and mac developers. We
use Mercurial which you can think of as a simplified and easier
version of git. This has a crossplatform UI front end called
tortoisehg which most windows users here use.
Our source control history has included, Visual
On Wed, 2014-02-26 at 21:12 +0100, Manfred Bergmann wrote:
I don't like git as well.
Could I ask, please, why do you not like git today? I mean git as it
stands in Winter/Early Spring 2014, not some original version?
Otherwise, yes, I believe that everything outside of git is more or less
dead
Could I ask, please, why do you not like git today? I mean git as it
stands in Winter/Early Spring 2014, not some original version?
It is completely over-engineered and over-complicated. I mean, which is better,
merging or rebasing? Not even the git fans can agree.
People who love git
The Kernel does pull requests but just via email. They don't email
patches around. Not since they went to GIT.
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 10:20 AM, Raoul Snyman ra...@snyman.info wrote:
Could I ask, please, why do you not like git today? I mean git as it
stands in Winter/Early Spring 2014, not
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 3:20 PM, Raoul Snyman ra...@snyman.info wrote:
Could I ask, please, why do you not like git today? I mean git as it
stands in Winter/Early Spring 2014, not some original version?
It is completely over-engineered and over-complicated. I mean, which is
better, merging
On Wed, 2014-02-26 at 23:20 +0200, Raoul Snyman wrote:
It is completely over-engineered and over-complicated. I mean, which is
better, merging or rebasing? Not even the git fans can agree.
It depends. These are two different tools for two different operations.
E.g., IMNSHO you should merge
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 25.02.2014 02:21, Troy A. Griffitts wrote:
I hesitate to even humor yet another response to unwarranted
criticism.
Let's just say what you really mean: You think people have
trouble contributing to the SWORD project because we don't use your
Hi Jaak,
You're new here. The Zefania/Haggai/True Sharp Sword/Free Scriptures
people are not. They've been competing with us for over a decade.
Their competition consists of ripping off content in violation of
licenses and trolling sword-devel. There's a program somewhere that uses
Zefania
Hi Jaak,
I've been around CrossWire for quite a few years without actually being
part of the official group, so I think my opinion might be helpful here as
I don't have any turf to defend (CrossWire regulars: please chip in if I'm
misrepresenting anything).
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 7:18 PM, Jaak
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi!
I must say that although I do not agree with all the criticism of the
Sword project I do agree with some of it, and I actually hope that a
bit of healthy competition would help both parties.
IMHO this again highlights some of the problems of the
Hi,
Jaak Ristioja wrote:
In addition, although Sword is GPL, there are many obstacles for
outsiders to actually start contributing to the project, hence I
somewhat understand why Sword might be perceived as not Free
software.
One of the freedoms of the GNU General Public License is that
I wonder if the fact that the sword module format is undocumented and
not published contributes to this perception. There are at least 4
different projects that I know of which implement sword module
support. And they have either had to look at the sword code and thus
accept GPL2 (no plus)
Historically, CrossWire has always maintained that our data formats are
volatile. We optimize them, add new features to them, basically change
them if we feel they need changing. In reality one could say that they
haven't changed much in the past few years, but this is only cursorily
true.
Jaak,
I hesitate to even humor yet another response to unwarranted criticism.
Let's just say what you really mean: You think people have trouble
contributing to the SWORD project because we don't use your choice of
source control software and because we have a very tight approval
process
On Feb 24, 2014, at 5:59 PM, Stephan Kreutzer skreut...@freiebibel.de wrote:
The only module that we retain the text for is the KJV. I am the maintainer
for that source, and if you'd like it, just ask. It is freely available, but
I've not been very good on making it clear what is the most
Regardless of what you want, the fact is that it's already to late.
JSword, sharpsword, CrossConnect and who knows what else already use
your format.
You are the authoritative source for other projects weather you like
it or not. The sword modules you have are an invaluable resource for
other
Small correction: JSword is part of The SWORD Project and was created by
members of CrossWire Bible Society. We've also created SWIG and Corba bindings
so that the SWORD library is available in many contexts.
Many of the modules have been licensed to CrossWire for use by The SWORD
Project. Not
Smith dmsm...@crosswire.org
To: SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum sword-devel@crosswire.org
Cc: SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum sword-devel@crosswire.org
Subject: [sword-devel] Project Free Scriptures started
Date: Tue, Feb 25, 2014 04:21
Small correction: JSword is part of The SWORD
Hello,
I just want to announce that the project “Free Scriptures” (see
http://www.free-scriptures.org) was started some time ago, which has the
goal of developing freely licensed software for processing bible texts
into various output formats. It will also serve as platform for
“language
On Sat, 2014-02-22 at 21:02 +0100, Stephan Kreutzer wrote:
We refuse to use or integrate
non-free, restrictive, proprietary software, because digital freedom
Which SWORD **software** is proprietary???
I hope you at least don’t hinder our efforts,
/me thinks about David Haslam in combat
Stephan,
We've had too many spammers signing up for the forums. About 400 a day, IIRC.
So we shut down registrations as we look for a better option.
So here is a great place for such conversation.
It seems your email is combative. I hope it is just a language difference.
Regarding the SWORD
Realizing that this is chiefly a troll, I'll just correct a couple of
the dumber falsehoods. I'd intended to post an advertisement for The
SWORD Project on your message board akin to your spam ad to sword-devel,
but it's clear that no one is on your message board other than you and
woschultz.
31 matches
Mail list logo
