Hi :) Yes, i was trying to keep it simple and practical by avoiding side issues or detail. Even so my post turned out to be a lot longer than planned!
For some projects stability = stagnation ie that the 3.0.0 could be considered stable because pretty much all the bugs are known issues and mostly written-up somewhere. That has never been considered good enough in LO. The earlier releases in a branch are not considered "more stable" after the branch reaches .3 or .4. It's only the .3 or .4 and onwards that are considered more stable. Time-based releases vs "release when ready". Whichever methodology is used it's only after initial proper release that the thing gets used on the mad set-ups out in the real world that most problems surface and get fixed. With MS products many corporates wouldn't consider installing before Service Pack 1 got released, which means it's only after SP 1 that many problems come to light! So, i agree with Stuart and most of the rest of the project on this issue. I'm sure the arguments about which is best will continue for another 7 years in most projects (and possibly longer). We all get to play ginea pig but we would with proprietary software too. The difference is that if a problem we reported does get fixed we get the fix for free along with all the updates that we didn't help with. There is no paying for upgrades or being pushed into buying a different bundle by some salesman. Regards from Tom :) >________________________________ > From: V Stuart Foote <vstuart.fo...@utsa.edu> >To: "users@global.libreoffice.org" <users@global.libreoffice.org> >Sent: Sunday, 4 August 2013, 16:58 >Subject: RE: [libreoffice-users] stable vs new > > >Folks, > >In opening this thread ( Nabble >http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/stable-vs-new-tp4068750.html ) Tom is >correct in a practical sense. Stability is an inherent component of a mature >product. And testing during the development cycles by more potential user >willing to invest a little time in QA is essential to the health of the >project. > >But a key aspect Tom omits is that LibreOffice development and release stages >are tightly timed--and by proxy so is its support. Nor does he mention that >the project has stayed on schedule since inception--synchronizing to a six >month minor release cycle implemented in a broader ecosystem of Free and Open >Source Software. > >The Release Plan for LibreOffice publishes the release schedule, current >status and a historical record of the project, worth a read: > >https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Release_Plan > >Keeping to the time based release plan means that the delay between initial >release on a minor version and the next minor version release is just six >months. And that the delay between the x.x.0 release and each bug fix release >has been and will continue to be just one month. So, while I don't >completely agree Toms' assessment of how far along each bug fix takes >things--it is just not the way the user feedback, QA,and development work >proceeds--but it is not unreasonable practical advise. > >Support has kept to the same cycle--for the most part--user documentation >(static HTML or wiki based, and published) can always use more active >contributors and lags a bit as a result. > >This is not just development churn, there is solid User eXperience, QA and >development work at every tick of the release cycle. And as a minor release >nears end of its development life it gets less and less development >attention--QA and development resources long since shifted to new development >and bug fixes. Enhancements and bug fixes become more and more costly to push >backward with each tick in development cycle--so less likely to occur. In a >sense that also is stability, or maybe stagnation. > >The project is on sound footings as a time based release, that is not going to >change so no sense in debating it here. Rather, if you have specific questions >or comments about its implementation or how best to make use of software from >time based release managed project that would be a worthwhile discussion. > >Stuart >a LibreOffice QA volunteer, focusing on accessibility issues. > >p.s. For use Accessibility and Assistive Technology tools the use of a Java >7, Java Runtime Environment and the Java Access Bridge v2.0.3 was not ported >backward to the 3.6.x branch. It was included in the 4.1.0 release, and has >been patched for the upcoming 4.0.5 release. Users of 3.6.x must continue to >use a Java 6 JRE (e.g. 1.6u45) and manual install of Java Access Bridge >v2.0.2. > > -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.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.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
