Hi David, David Lowe wrote:
> On May 17, 2008, at 01:39 , Cor Nouws wrote: > >> And btw it won't be difficult to present dics as an extension. > > That does not at all diminish the fact that there are a lot of .dic > files 'in the wild' that aren't available through the current system > - like the chemistry dictionary that got me started on this. Unless > you've got volunteers lined up to track down and convert this stuff, > you're basically asking the users to reinvent the wheel. Regardless > of how difficult it will be to convert [and i reserve the right to be > skeptical on these claims], the fact remains that you expect me to > take time away from what i'm working on to fiddle with something i'd > rather not fiddle with. Nope. I don't think so... If no one else is willing to invest that tiny 10-15 minutes to do so you can alway write an issue to me ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) or [EMAIL PROTECTED] (with me in cc) about this and I happily spend the few minutes to create that oxt. Just add the relevant information to the issue as well. E.g. Some descriptive text to be listed on the download page and a appropriate license file. E.g. one that states the dictionary to be published under GPL 3.0. The essence being: If you can convert the dictionaries to oxt and upload them on your own that is fine. But if you can't or don't have the time, just providing the dictionary and writing an issue to have someone else take care of the rest is fine as well! Regards, Thomas --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
