[sword-devel] [sword-support] deuterocanonical support

Jonathan Morgan jonmmorgan at gmail.com
Mon Mar 16 05:39:07 MST 2009

On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 11:07 PM, Troy A. Griffitts
<scribe at crosswire.org> wrote:
> A couple quick clarifications about av11n and others...
> There are technically 2 routes to support this under development:
> 1) ripping out the hardcoded KJV canon.h offsets and replacing them with
> VerseMgr, which allows registration of canon.h-like v11n systems.
> 2) genbook Bibles
> Both have been under development and 2 requires 1.
> 1 is complete and constitutes SVN HEAD, so if you are using SVN HEAD and
> consider it stable, then that is a good thing.
> SVN HEAD only has 1 registered v11n: KJV.  Chris is adding a few more and
> then we hope to release.
> I hope I never gave the impression that 1.5.12 was to be a quick bugfix.

I include below an email from you from the end of November last year
suggesting such a thing.  It's a long time since November.  Not
wanting to be contentious, but there was considerable feeling then
from different frontend developers that a release was overdue and
needed.  Months have passed since then.  Whether or not alternate
versification is considered important, I can see no good reason not to
release with bug-fixes and efficiency improvements so that it can be
used now (or preferably three months ago).  It shouldn't be hard,
unless there is something very complex about the release process that
I'm not aware of, and I offered assistance in preparing a release in
private mail more than a month ago that was ignored.  Just as a
sampler of the changes (with timescales from memory only and very
* Important efficiency fix affecting viability of compressed modules
(>6 months ago?).
* Security issue fixed (~3 months ago?)

These are the kind of things that need to be released sooner rather
than later.  They don't need to be sent out with great fanfare, just
made available in a new minor point release (security issues
especially, though I doubt anyone is likely to guess it, let alone
exploit it).

I have written a suggested release plan for the project some time ago,
which I don't need to repeat here.


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Troy A. Griffitts <scribe at crosswire.org>
Date: Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 6:40 AM
Subject: [sword-devel] Next Release (was: Taming Wild Threads)
To: SWORD Developers' Collaboration Forum <sword-devel at crosswire.org>

Good suggestion Karl.  Others sound like they would also like this.  May
I ask first for some feedback regarding current state of TRUNK?  I
believe we have a fairly optimized impl of the old functionality running
in the new paradigm of dyn versification.  We might be able to clean it
up by next week.  I currently understand there are two issues:

1) non-backward-compat change of removing VerseKey::books hardcoded
array.  We've talked about adding a SWORDVERSION define, but I just had
a 'doh' moment and realized we have: pkg-config --modversion sword

2) stability: we are missing bounds checks for calls into the new
VerseMgr, resulting in crashes if you, for example, ask for the max
chapter of a book which doesn't exist.  I think this is the main cause
for crashes, but it would be nice to get some feedback from the frontend
developers of how stable the current code base is.  After a few days of
hunting bugs and valgrinding, we can make a good decision if we should
release without dyn versification.

I would like to have a release soon, as well.  We have committed to a 6
month release cycle and are about 1 month late, I believe.


More information about the sword-devel mailing list