Michael Adams wrote: > On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 10:28:42 +0000 > mike scott wrote: > >> On 11 Dec 2007 at 8:51, Mathias Bauer wrote: >> ... >> > That would look different if we stepped back to less frequent >> > feature releases so that bugfix releases happened much more often. >> > But I don't see that at the horizon. >> > >> > I think it makes more sense to stick with full updates but make >> > their installation smoother. >> >> That's fine for those of us on high-speed links. And I like to have >> the full release archived "just in case" a roll-back is needed in >> future (as nearly happened going from 2.2 -> 2.3). >> >> But what about those on dial-up lines, or who for some other reason >> have difficulty in downloading? Is it fair to tell them to keep buying >> CDs from someone to get the new release? /If/ (and I don't know the >> figures) they represent a significant proportion of the likely user >> community (present /and future/) will this update policy impact >> unduly on the market penetration of OOo? > > If i was in that situation, i would just weigh up the relative merits of > the upgrade: > * Is it a feature release?
This is easy. Each minor is a feature release, each micro isn't. Besides that the release notes also explicitly mentions that. > * Is it a bugfix that i was waiting for? The fixed bugs in a release are listed somewhere and also are the new features. I'm not sure if the download site has a direct link to that lists. But I agree that it should have one. > * Is it a security upgrade? If security fixes have been applied in a release is always explicitly mentioned in the release notes. Ciao, Mathias -- Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer OpenOffice.org Engineering at Sun: http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS Please don't reply to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]". I use it for the OOo lists and only rarely read other mails sent to it. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
