[sword-devel] Legitimate FTP Mirrors & Module Distribution Rights Question

Karl Kleinpaste karl at kleinpaste.org
Thu Jul 26 15:53:21 MST 2012

Greg Hellings <greg.hellings at gmail.com> writes:
> there is a path underneath modules/ that corresponds with where kjv
> would have been downloaded to (modules/texts/ztext) but the kjv
> directory under that is gone.

...because it was mv'd to the normal location after retrieval.

> Thus, we just ensure that the module name is unique and then
> there is no problem. If the world of modules available continues to
> grow then someone might need to eventually add this functionality.

Frankly, I hope not.

The repositories do not represent (as it were) individual bookstores,
from any of which one might find any given module.  Rather, the repos
represent individual publishers, and patrons get their modules directly,
without a middle-man bookstore.

If, for example, there ever comes to be a "2nd KJV," its very presence
will cause more grief than can be reasonably contained.  If someone were
to create a version of KJV with (say) study notes attached as extensive
footnotes, Scofield-style, such a module should get a different name,
such as KJVstudy or somesuch thing.

I understand the argument for wanting both KJV 2.3 (main) and 2.4 (beta)
to be installed.  But honestly, the utility of such a thing has such a
small, marginal audience that I just don't see value in the
implementation.  They're just different versions of the same thing,
never intended by to be installed together: By far, far, far, far, far,
Joe Average wants "the" KJV module, and will stick with it, though he
/may/ upgrade it, if he should ever notice that a newer version has
shown up.  How often does Joe Average even invoke a module manager
(install manager, bookshelf manager), so as to notice?


More information about the sword-devel mailing list