Hi :)
I would only go with the 3.6.7 if you are currently on the 3.6.x branch and 
need to stay there or if you have need of staying with the accessibility 
java-bridge, older version for other programs.  


I think everyone else is better off with 4.0.4 and perhaps update in that 
branch as it steadily marches onwards.  

On the other hand i still have plenty of machines on 3.5.something and it's a 
free world so you can do as you please.  

Regards from 

Tom :)  





----- Forwarded Message -----
>From: Girvin R. Herr <[email protected]>
>To: Tom Davies <[email protected]> 
>Cc: V Stuart Foote <[email protected]>; "[email protected]" 
><[email protected]> 
>Sent: Sunday, 4 August 2013, 21:23
>Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] stable vs new
> 
>
>Tom,
>To me:
>stability = productivity
>But I am just a lowly user.
>
>Nice description!  I saved it for future reference.
>Now I know why I keep getting 3.x update notices when 4.x has been 
>released some time ago.  That surprised, but pleased, me.  As a result 
>of your description, I will have to repackage and install 3.6.7 after my 
>monthly backup today.
>Girvin Herr
>
>
>On 08/04/2013 10:35 AM, Tom Davies wrote:
>> 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 <[email protected]>
>>> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
>>> 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: [email protected]
>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
>
>
>
-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [email protected]
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

Reply via email to