Active Topics
-
Firefox with Leste (5)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by teroyk - 4 days, 5 hrs ago -
Handbook (2)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by teroyk - 5 days, 4 hrs ago - more...
|
2009-10-29
, 02:24
|
|
Posts: 111 |
Thanked: 80 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
|
#202
|
Originally Posted by ARJWright
ARJWright, I think that was Nathan's point; Olive Tree is obviously making their money off of the modules, so wouldn't they welcome another reader, which would allow them to sell more modules?
For Olive Tree, the reader is free; all of the modules are not.
|
|
2009-10-29
, 02:51
|
|
Posts: 452 |
Thanked: 522 times |
Joined on Nov 2007
|
#203
|
Originally Posted by ARJWright
Well some of the modules is free; I just downloaded directly from them the ASV for no cost. I just clicked the "free" tab at the top, and picked one.
For Olive Tree, the reader is free; all of the modules are not.
The point I was trying to make was if their "reader" is free, and our "reader" is free. What are we really competing against? The only reason to be able to read another engines modules directly would be to get "commercial" Bibles on our platform. Otherwise this is a pointless work.
Once we have the ability to do that, the users still have to purchase them from somewhere. If it is <insert vendor> than, they are potentially making more money for actually doing no work.
.
Since I'm not in this arena and you have been for a long time; How can they really say "no" to an offer like that? What arguments are going against our idea?
Nathan
|
|
2009-10-29
, 02:53
|
|
Posts: 452 |
Thanked: 522 times |
Joined on Nov 2007
|
#204
|
Originally Posted by joshn53
Nope, I'm not sure any of us has a n900 yet on this thread. Are you pulling the latest Qt 4.6 from git?
Does anyone on this thread have an actual N900 device? I'm curious because I compiled the Qt 4.6 alpha that was released, but the kinetic (finger) scrolling doesn't work on the simulator. I'm not sure if this is a problem with the simulator, or not - the demo videos from Trolltech seem to show finger scrolling. If anyone does, could I help you get Qt SDK running, to see if stuff works correctly?
I guess it's not that big a deal. I was just hoping to have a working version for the initial launch.
Nathan
|
|
2009-10-29
, 03:14
|
|
Posts: 452 |
Thanked: 522 times |
Joined on Nov 2007
|
#205
|
Originally Posted by joshn53
Sure drop it into /src/trunk.
Nathan, I'm ready to import my code to garage.maemo.org. Is it fair to bring it into /src/trunk?
I'll just admit that I'm a little bit nervous; I feel pretty strongly that the app should be kept as simple as possible, and I'm worried that it will accumulate all the features and options that a typical open source project does. Hopefully we can work together to avoid this.
I'm not at all for complicating things, I hate diving into complicated code bases <g> -- but I guess it really depends on what features we want to offer.
What about maybe a "plugin" system. Qt I believe has all the hooks for making a working plugin system. That would allow a basic simple Bible program for release, with little comlication.
But then allow us/others to make enhancements for those who want it. So if person A want commentaries; he downloads the "commentaries" plugin which allows them to be viewed and handled. etc. If person B wants ability to take notes, it would be a plugin. If person C wanted maps; it would be a plugin.
We could technically make the "sword" engine a plugin. Then if we do decide to make a engine compatible with a third party format it is just another "plugin" that is added to the system.
Thoughts? That does "complicate" it a bit more initially, but it would make keeping things a bit more simple for those who actually want a simple reader w/o all the bells and whistles. ;-)
Nathan.
 |
|
2009-10-29
, 03:21
|
|
Posts: 114 |
Thanked: 12 times |
Joined on Jul 2007
@ Somewhere, most of the time.
|
#206
|
Originally Posted by ARJWright
Just an FYI, I started praying about this about 2 years ago, althoug not daily. I also asked Olive Tree & Laradian about porting there softeare to maemo, with not results I would like.
Nathan, that's a good idea, but I want to sit on it a half day or so before thinking it all the way through.
For companies like OliveTree, Laridian, and even the Sword project, any effort to build another reader should not compete against their efforts, but extend it. I've got it in my to-do list to contact OliveTree and ask if they'd be interested in the compatibility for Maemo devices. As for other entities like Sword, Online Bible, etc., I need to think (and choose my words carefully due to my associations outside of Maemo).
I will "TRY" to remeber to pray daily for GODs will on this.
No matter what I think. GOD'S will be done.
Thanks for your efforts
A brother in Christ
Dan
__________________
SonShine
SonShine
|
|
2009-10-29
, 13:36
|
|
Posts: 111 |
Thanked: 80 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
|
#207
|
Originally Posted by Nathan
Actually, I've tried the alpha tarball, the the main git branch, as well as the qt-n900 branch.
Nope, I'm not sure any of us has a n900 yet on this thread. Are you pulling the latest Qt 4.6 from git?
Nathan
|
|
2009-10-29
, 13:52
|
|
Posts: 111 |
Thanked: 80 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
|
#208
|
Originally Posted by Nathan
I'm more worried about program interface complexity than code complexity. I don't want a program that does everything under the sun; I want a simple Bible reader that does one thing (reading the bible) and does it well. Now, in some ways, adding support for commentaries makes sense. Possibly even note taking, though that has the possibility to really add complexity to the UI. But maps?
Sure drop it into /src/trunk.
I'm not at all for complicating things, I hate diving into complicated code bases <g> -- but I guess it really depends on what features we want to offer.
What about maybe a "plugin" system. Qt I believe has all the hooks for making a working plugin system. That would allow a basic simple Bible program for release, with little comlication.
But then allow us/others to make enhancements for those who want it. So if person A want commentaries; he downloads the "commentaries" plugin which allows them to be viewed and handled. etc. If person B wants ability to take notes, it would be a plugin. If person C wanted maps; it would be a plugin.
We could technically make the "sword" engine a plugin. Then if we do decide to make a engine compatible with a third party format it is just another "plugin" that is added to the system.
Thoughts? That does "complicate" it a bit more initially, but it would make keeping things a bit more simple for those who actually want a simple reader w/o all the bells and whistles. ;-)
Nathan.
As far as support for different Bible formats, that can easily be done with different backends - the code is already structured in such a way that would make that relatively easy. If conversions and file formats are your specialty, I would really appreciate if you could do some work to see if we can read the Bible+ format. If you can get even basic code in place, I can tie it in to Katana.
|
|
2009-10-29
, 14:33
|
|
Posts: 452 |
Thanked: 522 times |
Joined on Nov 2007
|
#209
|
Originally Posted by joshn53
I have no interested in Maps myself; but a ton of Bible readers post it as a "feature" of their programs... (Hence the idea of a plugin, if another developer has a serious interest in doing it -- let them).
I'm more worried about program interface complexity than code complexity. I don't want a program that does everything under the sun; I want a simple Bible reader that does one thing (reading the bible) and does it well. Now, in some ways, adding support for commentaries makes sense. Possibly even note taking, though that has the possibility to really add complexity to the UI. But maps?
I'm more interested in just the "basic" Bible reader also; the only thing that I do want to see is two versions on the screen. I like being able to compare. I also want fast search. ;-)
As far as support for different Bible formats, that can easily be done with different backends - the code is already structured in such a way that would make that relatively easy. If conversions and file formats are your specialty, I would really appreciate if you could do some work to see if we can read the Bible+ format. If you can get even basic code in place, I can tie it in to Katana.
Sure, that sounds great -- I'll tackle the Bible+ format. ;-)
Nathan.
|
|
2009-10-29
, 14:49
|
|
Posts: 452 |
Thanked: 522 times |
Joined on Nov 2007
|
#210
|
Originally Posted by joshn53
Well I guess that covers it. ;-)
Actually, I've tried the alpha tarball, the the main git branch, as well as the qt-n900 branch.
Nathan
 |
| Tags |
| bible, maemo 5, rapier, reference browser, religious apps, scripture reader, sword |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 15:35.
I'll just admit that I'm a little bit nervous; I feel pretty strongly that the app should be kept as simple as possible, and I'm worried that it will accumulate all the features and options that a typical open source project does. Hopefully we can work together to avoid this.