[Pkg-crosswire-devel] Sword packaging status 2008-01-24

[Matthew Talbert]

>> 3) you should not maintain sword modules as all our programmes have a
>> module manager which will download modules directly. Installing modules
>> via apt-get renders the module manager non-functional as the modules are
>> installed by apt-get into non user writable areas (/usr/share/sword
>> instead of ~/.sword)
>
> Disagreed with.  This is a module manager bug, it can't handle modules
> installed in places it has no write access to -- it doesn't ask for sudo
> permissions when it could do so to obtain such access.  And since
> /usr/share/sword is stated by docs in the upstream tarball as being one
> standard location for modules, installing them there cannot be a
> packaging issue :)

I don't entirely agree with this, but I'll save that for another day.
The biggest issue to me is to remove the dependencies on the modules.
An English speaker should not be forced to have an Arabic Bible and an
Arabic speaker should not be forced to have an English Bible. This
leads to a lot of support requests.

On packaging modules, note that there is no good place to draw the
line about which to package and which not to. Some modules debian
wouldn't be allowed to distribute because of licensing issues (quite a
few modules). There are several gigabytes of modules available in
various languages. How do you pick which to package and which not to?

Matthew