I'm very happy to discover how many people use KonNYM!! I'm working on a new version with notes. And we are translating the old testament...
Le 09/06/2017 à 19:36, DM Smith a écrit : > BTW, I’ve shortened this, removing country info, so you can reply to > it without having it bounce for being too big… > >> On Jun 9, 2017, at 2:13 PM, DM Smith wrote: >> >> Here are the stats for as far back as we have them. Total by module >> broken out by “agent” and then by country. Other (SWORD) is the >> installmgr that doesn’t further identify itself like xiphos and >> PocketSword do. FTP & HTTP - Direct downloads are all downloads that >> are not identified as one of the others. >> >> Given the high number of times that PorCap has been downloaded, I >> think we need to try to maintain backward compatibility. >> >> [dmsmith@www bin]$ ./moduleStats.pl -name KonNYM,PorCap,SloStritar >> -start 1900-01-01 -end now >> 16085PorCap >> By agent >> 8441AndBible (JSword) >> 3290Other (SWORD) >> 1490Xiphos (SWORD) >> 1205PocketSword (SWORD) >> 1034HTTP - Direct download >> 277Other (JSword) >> 251Search engine >> 97FTP - Direct download >> ============ >> >> 1427SloStritar >> By agent >> 799Other (SWORD) >> 196AndBible (JSword) >> 160Search engine >> 95HTTP - Direct download >> 71FTP - Direct download >> 71Xiphos (SWORD) >> 21Other (JSword) >> 14PocketSword (SWORD) >> ============ >> >> 919KonNYM >> By agent >> 557Other (SWORD) >> 123Search engine >> 72HTTP - Direct download >> 51AndBible (JSword) >> 49Xiphos (SWORD) >> 44FTP - Direct download >> 14Other (JSword) >> 9PocketSword (SWORD) >> ============ >> >>> On Jun 9, 2017, at 1:33 PM, DM Smith wrote: >>> >>> I’d like to have Troy and Peter’s guidance on this. It is both a >>> software and a module management issue. Back in the day, we knew >>> this was likely to happen. >>> >>> I’m still gathering stats. It is a slow process. I think it should >>> help inform a decision. The upshot is that there are thousands of >>> downloads of these three modules since they have been introduced. >>> Some are more popular than others. Details to follow. >>> >>> The question is how to go forward. One way is to break backward >>> compatibility. The other is to try to create a reasonable migration >>> path. (Which is what I recommend.) >>> >>> From an engineering perspective, we can have any number of >>> versifications in the engine and they can have any name. However, >>> we’ve been reluctant to add versifications, especially if they are >>> one offs. So far versification names are a blend of A-Za-z0-9, I >>> don’t know if there are other restrictions. It seems to follow C >>> variable naming restrictions. >>> >>> Things to consider when updating a module’s conf. >>> MinimumVersion. When we add a new versification, it is tied to a >>> particular release. This means that new module potentially won’t be >>> available until the SWORD engine is released (any day now….) and the >>> front-end is updated. >>> >>> Obsoletes. For a module to obsolete another, it needs a different >>> [Name] and have Obsoletes. It probably should have a different >>> Description (old JSword bug, long since fixed, doesn’t like it when >>> two modules have the same Description). >>> >>> Versification. It should give the appropriate v11n. >>> >>> DM >>> >>>> On Jun 9, 2017, at 11:13 AM, Cyrille wrote: >>>> >>>> Not a lot! And Konnym doesn't have (not yet) the Old Testament. I >>>> manage it... >>>> Then if you prefer to write a new v11n, I can do it. But what name >>>> to give it? And I would to write 2 v11n, one for esther 10 and one >>>> for Esther 16. >>>> A name can be CatholicEs10, and CatholicEs16? >>>> >>>> Le 09/06/2017 à 15:46, DM Smith a écrit : >>>>> On the CrossWire server the following are in the main repository: >>>>> konnym.conf:Versification=Catholic2 >>>>> porcap.conf:Versification=Catholic >>>>> slostritar.conf:Versification=Catholic >>>>> >>>>> Checking the download stats for these. Will get back with the results. >>>>> >>>>> In Him, >>>>> DM >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Jun 9, 2017, at 10:37 AM, Cyrille wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> What the solution proposed? Is it possible to know exactly how >>>>>> modules >>>>>> are compiled with the Catholic and Catholic2? I'm interesting to >>>>>> know it... >>>>>> >>>>>> Le 06/06/2017 à 14:50, DM Smith a écrit : >>>>>>> If an existing v11n changes, all modules released by it will >>>>>>> have to be re-released with the update and all front-ends will >>>>>>> have to be recompiled with it. JSword will need to change too >>>>>>> and front-ends based upon it, also. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The reason is simple the index file for a testament is an >>>>>>> indexed array with each verse in the v11n having a predetermined >>>>>>> index. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If no modules have been released with it, it is a fairly safe >>>>>>> change. The risk are older front-ends with the wrong tables. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Issuing a v2 (simply another v11n with a new name) and >>>>>>> deprecating the older probably is a safer change. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In Him, > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
_______________________________________________ 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
