I still abide by a statement attributed to Adam Osborne back in the 80s:
"He, who lives on the cutting edge of technology, gets sliced to bits."
Since the 3.6 series works fine for me, I will wait until the knife edge
dulls a bit before I make the leap to 4.1.
Girvin Herr
On 08/04/2013 02:08 PM, Tom Davies wrote:
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 <girvin.h...@sbcglobal.net>
To: Tom Davies <tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk>
Cc: V Stuart Foote <vstuart.fo...@utsa.edu>; "users@global.libreoffice.org"
<users@global.libreoffice.org>
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 <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
--
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
