[sword-devel] ISV status?

[Andrew Thule]

On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 1:35 AM, Chris Little <chrislit at crosswire.org> wrote:

> We've actually had specific discussions with you about our not wanting you
> to redistribute our modules, specifically because of copyrighted content
> such as this for which WE have permission. YOU are not CrossWire. Any
> reasonable person would conclude that he did not have permission to
> distribute unless his name were, by some coincidence, "CrossWire".
>

Chris, you're already making modules based upon the ISV publically
available (are you not?).  Once you made it clear you wanted me to 'take it
down' and I did - where exactly is the problem here?


>
> I'm curious what your train of thought was that led you to conclude that
> YOU should distribute a module that we were not distributing, when your
> basis for distribution was a belief that WE had permission to distribute it.
>

I've already explained my train of thought on this.  Crosswire freely
distributes version 1.5 of a module based upon ISV.  One of the developers
asks about updating it to include the OT.  Checking the distribution rights
contained in the isv.conf file, I see that Crosswire is already permitted
to distribute this copyrighted text so offer to help.  You ask me to remove
the module from my repo - which I do.  Peter gets angry and tells me to
leave.


>
> The .conf you had posted obviously was not for that version of the module,
> given that the SourceType was wrong and all of the other details simply
> reflected our released version:
> http://www.crosswire.org/**ftpmirror/pub/sword/raw/mods.**d/isv.conf<http://www.crosswire.org/ftpmirror/pub/sword/raw/mods.d/isv.conf>
>

Perhaps, but we didn't get very far into discussions about module
development before people started to exhibit 'knee-jerk' reactions.  The
.conf file (like all) is subject to change depending upon the needs of the
module.  (FYI I simply modified that .conf file incrementing the version
number so it wouldn't be mistaken for the version Crosswire is already
sharing with the world - this is more than a reasonable small change to
make).


> The basis for the module you posted was outdated at the time it was
> produced and had been removed from the publisher's website by then. The
> OSIS document produced from this was furthermore not valid XML (unless it
> has been updated in the last year). So conversion from a Word document is
> still necessary. And unless the process for converting from that Word
> document can be replicated (via scripts) the whole exercise of producing
> that OSIS document was without value.
>
> --Chris
>
>

This is the kind of dialogue that actually gets things done, improves
modules and moves things forward.  I have no trouble believing what you say
above and still would volunteer to do the work ...

~A
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.crosswire.org/pipermail/sword-devel/attachments/20130104/43ad89e0/attachment.html>