[sword-devel] FireBible is back - 2.0b3 released!
infernalproteus at gmail.com
Sun May 10 14:44:29 MST 2015
On 10/5/15 10:25 PM, Matěj Cepl wrote:
> On 2015-05-10, 09:22 GMT, Brian Fernandes wrote:
>> Thanks for pointing that out, no - I was *not* aware of this. We're
>> using js-ctypes, so I believe we're okay, at least for the immediate
>> future. Having said that, the article doesn't speak too favorably about
>> this technology either, so I wonder how long it will last. I'll talk to
>> John and see what we need to do, if anything.
> Just a side-note: I think time is coming more and more to bit
> the bullet and accept https://github.com/zefanja/swordjs as
> a third blessed Sword-compatible system. I am not crazy about
> the current trend of “throw out all programs we have ever
> is getting inevitable to follow the suit. At least with the
> oncoming ES6 the language is getting to be less ridiculous
> (modules and libraries are now being possible at least).
True, it isn't so far fetched anymore. Even being barely involved with
Sword / JSword development though, I balk at the amount of work that
will be required to make swordjs work as well as Sword and JSword.
Completing support is one thing (swordjs currently only supports zText
Bible modules), but fixing the detailed issues you see reported against
these engines is another. Still, the fact that swordjs can do so much
already likely proves that this JS implementation can ultimately go all
the way and this is great.
FireBible's key differentiator is the fact that it's protocol based, and
works within your regular Firefox session as opposed to being a separate
app like (like XULSword / BibleZ). I believe this is something that adds
unique value to some users, while others might not care for it at all -
other than the Ubiquity integration (my personal favorite ), it is not
exceptional in any of the other features it supports.
The Future of FireBible would depend on how many users use and
appreciate this sort of front-end (certainly not a small amount of work
maintaining it) and what goes on with Mozilla on the technology side. As
far as the latter is concerned, I found that FireBible breaks in version
40a because of the new multi-process or "es10" support, if you turn that
off, it works just fine. The bug is here:
The fact that this issue was reported 1.5 years ago, breaks about half a
dozen extensions, but is still not assigned nor prioritized is
troubling. I half expect Mozilla to say that custom protocols will no
longer be supported (though some extensions like ChatZilla which use it
are quite popular); I pray I'm not right.
More information about the sword-devel