Hi Thorsten, all Continuing our discussion in public: if branch 3.5 is the stable one, isn't it correct to assume that PortableApps AND TDF should be coherent with the ReleasePlan? http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleasePlan
If there is only one Recommended version then it should be the current branch until the new branch reaches x.x.3 That is the version that TDF and PortableApps should have available. Otherwise it is BAD propaganda to have an Early adopters version (TDF's own definition) as the showcase for LibreOffice (Portable or not) However if TDF doesn't follow their own Release Lifecycle (see image in the linked page), how can you ask that from PortableApps? This is something that the BoD needs to decide. If the Lifecycle has no value, then stop wasting time and resources on maintaining the previous branch. If it makes sense then don't recommend the new branch until it reaches x.x.3 The download page just needs to reflect this decision. All other versions are in different states of Development. These should be available on a *separate* page for people who don't mind having unstable versions but want the latest features (of course whining is not acceptable from such users but bug reporting his highly valued) And to be coherent with this only the recommended version should be announced. Announcing versions from both branches (http://blog.documentfoundation.org/) just generates confusion. Just my 2 cents Regards, Pedro -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/LibreOffice-Portable-tp4009436p4009682.html Sent from the Discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted