[sword-devel] summary

Familie von Kaehne refdoc at gmx.net
Sat Nov 29 06:15:09 MST 2008

DM Smith wrote:
> Again the reason we don't have such a repository is because we don't  
> want to become a secondary repository of primary works. We'd need to  
> figure out how to work around that.

Part of my desire for a module source repository has been addressed by
the apparent acceptance for a round trip with improvement for a module.

In the past when I reported problems (UTF8 encoding, verse separation
etc)  I was stopped from simply doing a round trip and do the change,
but it appears that this is now accepted.

I was told we would need to recreate the module from source.

Now I am capable of doing the first, but the second is often beyond me.
I guess others are in the same position.

In consequence we had often for a fair while modules with serious
problems in the main repository.

Can I assume that the round-trip with improvement is now accepted practice?

More information about the sword-devel mailing list