[sword-devel] Legitimate FTP Mirrors & Module Distribution Rights Question
thulester at gmail.com
Sat Jul 28 17:17:45 MST 2012
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 6:53 PM, Karl Kleinpaste <karl at kleinpaste.org> wrote:
> 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.
The value in differentiating source repositories is not to establish
'bookstores'. Rather the value is in being able to support multiple
repositories where there may in fact be a common store of modules also
found elsewhere. Because there are many modules not representing any
publishers, modules not subject to restrictions in their licenses,
there will be repos with redundant copies of modules. Because the
number of modules without restriction in their license exceeds the
ones with restrictions, I'm guessing that the they get the greater
degree of consideration. But that raises the question I was alluding
to initially; what is the philosophy behind Crosswire's efforts to
distribute scripture? Is it to have one 'official' source or more?
If the philosophy is to restrict distribution to one 'official'
Crosswire site, other sites will be seen as 'bookstores' (and
competing ones at that). On the other hand, if the philosophy is to
give the modules the widest possible distribution, two things likely
need to be established - a process by which mirrors become established
as 'official', and support for multiple site management in InstallMgr
(as well as other module distribution methods), in which case
provision for tracking source repos would be a desirable feature.
More information about the sword-devel