On 7 January 2013 21:15, Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> wrote: > > When a commercial software vendor says a configuration is "supported" > > it means something, typically that to the extent the software license > > includes an entitlement to support, that the vendor will provide that > > service for that configuration. So saying something is "supported" is > > essentially an obligation. > > > > With a volunteer-run, open source project, "supported" cannot mean > > quite the same thing. We're not obligated, in any contractual sense, > > to provide anyone with anything. That's the nature of a volunteer > > effort. > > > > For comparison, I came across this page for GNU Octave, where it > defines "Support Expectations": > http://www.gnu.org/software/octave/support-expectations.html > > Maybe that is a good way to think of it, defining expectations? > That is much better than "support", it goes well with what the users think and does not make the link support = obligation.
The page you refer to it well written, but in my opinion, talks to much about donations and does not concentrate on the issue.. -Rob > > > However, users and organizations considering OpenOffice will naturally > > think in terms of "support", even if they user that term loosely. We > > use that term as well, in our release notes, etc. But I think we > > ought to have a more precise definition of what we mean when we say > > something is "supported", in order to avoid any confusion. This > > question has come up recently, with regards to the status of Windows > > 8, where that OS had not been released at the time AOO 3.4.1 was > > released. > > > > So here's a strawman proposal for what "supported" means for us. > > > > 1) "Supported" is a statement we make about a specific version of AOO > > used with a specific platform, e.g., AOO 3.4.1 with Windows XP SP3 or > > AOO 3.4 with Ubuntu 12.04 LTS. > > > > 2) "Supported" means we encourage use of AOO in that configuration. > > We have high confidence that the combination is stable, that it works > > well and is safe. > > > > 3) Our confidence in stating something is supported should have a > > solid basis in testing. Something is not "supported" by us guessing > > it should work. It is supported only after we have successfully > > completed testing of that release with that platform. We probably > > should define exactly what level of testing is required. > > > > 4) "Supported" also implies that the supported configuration is > > sufficiently available and there is sufficient expertise that we have > > confidence that users will have a high quality experience seeking > > support on the forums and user list. > > > > 5) "Supported" also implies that we stand behind that release and will > > take necessary steps to correct *critical* bugs, especially security > > flaws, via rapidly produced point releases where necessary. > > > > Note that these are all expectations that a user might have, though > > any given user might think that "supported" means only a subset of > > these. > > > > What we probably really need is more of a lifecycle statement, > > including when support for a configuration ends. > > > > -Rob >
