[sword-devel] GnomeSword 2.3.1 (Re: 1.5.10 Released)

[Karl Kleinpaste]

"Troy A. Griffitts" <scribe at crosswire.org> writes:
> Do you think that the GnomeSword manual should be something that goes in 
> the module repository?

When we first discussed such things last November, I asked whether this
would be something of general utility; your comment at the time was, "I
think it would be neat to have genbooks of frontend manuals/promotion."
There was further discussion around that time that, at some point when
image support was more widespread, there would be general encouragement
offered to get similar promotional materials for all the UIs.

> My initial thought is that the repository should contain material based 
> on what it is, not necessarily what storage technology it uses.

I'm sorry but I don't follow that observation, insofar as GS doesn't
represent a particular storage technology.

> I would think you might include the manual in your software distro 
> packages, just like other projects include their manual in theirs.

Hm, well, the point as discussed at the time was to make UI manuals or
other promo materials available so that any user of any image-capable
Sword UI could get a look at "how the other half lives."  That's why I
maintain the GS manual module.  For GS users themselves, the regular
*.xml manual is already part of the source distribution (not useful
under Cygwin, where there is no manual viewer program, another reason
why keeping a manual module in place is needed).

If there is a problem with this module being part of a (non-beta)
Crosswire repository, then you might as well just take it down.  I will
maintain it in my own repo regardless.  Permanent condemnation to beta
purgatory is not useful due to the limited audience.

As for Chris' observation about single-point version numbers, that's
news to me.  I don't see why such an arbitrary restriction needs to be
in place, and if it's genuinely policy, then someone had better have a
chat with the folks at bible.org, because their repository's NET modules
are version 1.0.1.  There's nothing about a double-point version stamp
that keeps anything from working; it seems a needless restriction.