Please keep the version numbering as is, for the time beeing. If we had
to change it, it had to be done when we announced LibreOffice. Besides,
when we change numbers to 1.0 we better get a new name because our
message is that this is a new product in the markeplace. Now it is too
late unless we give up LibreOffice name.
Em 01-11-2010 15:03, Florian Effenberger escreveu:
Hi Sebastian,
Sebastian Spaeth wrote on 2010-11-01 16.36:
Dear all, all discussions seem to hint at that the first stable release
of LibreOffice is going to be a 3.3.0 release. I would like to have you
consider a different version for the following reasons:
- LO 3.3.0 suggests it is equivalent to OOo 3.3.0 (which it is not, we
have different bugs :-)). Seriously. LO 3.3.0 suggests 100%
interoperability with OOo which we can't guarantee.
- It is the first release of LO, but we consider it stable and useful,
so 1.0 would make most sense to me. That shouts "USE ME", but at the
same time does not convey "I am an OOo ripoff with a different brand
by some people with too big egos."
I'd love if you could briefly think about that in the next SC
meeting. I'll be happy about any decision, but it should be discussed
(and communicated) publicly.
thanks for the proposal. There have been already discussions about that,
and we came to the conclusion to start with 3.3, but not to follow all
version changes OOo does. Time will tell how our release cycle and
future version numbering would look like.
I doubt we'll go back to LibO 1.1, now that 3.3 has been announced, but
I'm open for the future which step(s) we want to make.
Happy to hear thoughts of the other SC members. :-)
Florian
--
Olivier Hallot
Steering Commitee
The Document Foundation
--
E-mail to [email protected] for instructions on how
to unsubscribe
List archives are available at
http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/steering-discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
deleted
