Hello Tom,
First, both Nino and Sophie's answers are really good. Mine was just
trying to be simple and short.
I think, just like Sophie suggested, that you are still thinking along
the "stable-unstable" pattern.
My answer, by the way, does not contraddict Nino or Sophie. Let me take
two -already used- examples to show you there is no contradiction.
MS Office 2011 and MS Office 2013. Both are stable. Both are still up
for sale. What's the real difference? More features in MS Office 2013,
sure. But both are stable. However 2011 gets more patches, is more
tested than Office 2013 (in this case users both pay and get to be
"guinea pigs").
Second example: Chevrolet Impala 2013 and 2011. What's the difference?
Well, there are a few cosmetic changes, perhaps one or two equipment
that changed; maybe a few more liveries available, but there's also been
a set of optimized industrial manufacturing processes that have been
improved between 2012 and 2013. Note: both are "stable", aka. fit to
have millions of people driving these cars. Are these drivers
guinea-pigs? Yes in a sense. I challenge you to find any sort of
distribution process of manufactured good, service, software, where uers
or customers are not guinea pigs in one way or another; Free Software is
just really transparent and honest about it, because after all, you're
not paying for anything when using it.
Hope this helped,
Charles.
Le 06.08.2014 11:38, Tom Davies a écrit :
Hi :)
This seems to contradict what both Charles and what Florian Reisinger
were
saying.
It does seem to make more sense though. It kinda explains why people
might
prefer one branch or the other one, which was very unclear from Charles
and
Florian's posts.
It also kinda explains the graphic on the;
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleasePlan
page, although that graphic doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Do
other
people understand it? There used to be a neat little graph which kinda
boggled the eyes at first but began to make sense after staring at it
for a
while.
The bit about "master branch" was a bit beyond me but suggested an
answer
to the older thread about how bug-fixes added to the older branch
manage to
get into the newer branch. Still i am sure i am not the only one
confused
by such a thing.
So Nino's answer suggests that some people might prefer the branch that
has
matured because by that time it is more stable. So releases with a
higher
3rd digit are more mature, more stable and less likely to have
problems.
The only downside is that you get less features.
Then it also makes sense that people would often prefer to use the
younger,
less mature branch even though it hasn't had as many bug-fixes added to
it.
However this seems to contradict what Charles was saying about both
branches being fully stable. So which is wrong?
Regards from
Tom :)
On 6 August 2014 09:42, Nino Novak <[email protected]> wrote:
Am 06.08.2014 07:29, schrieb Pikov Andropov:
> Florian Reisinger wrote on 8/6/2014 1:22 AM:
>> Hi,
>> The problem we have: We do not have one release branch as Firefox has,
we have two... Users should use and find bugs on the "Fresh" version
in
order to make thee fresh, which will be renamed to stable after 6M.
>> So how to say "you can use the feature packed fresh"? It is not an RC
it is an tested final release....
>> So yes, we have a different model, so we need different names then the
standard :)
>
> What are the differences between the two branches?
The younger one (fresh) has been forked later from the master
development
branch. Therefore it obviously has more features.
But as it is younger, it is less "mature" than the earlier (still)
branch.
If you look into each branch separately, the branch goes through the
well
known states (alpha, beta, RC, final) for its first release (the
x.y.0),
but
then keeps iterating through several additional (bugfix) releases,
from
x.y.1 to x.y.6 in most cases. So each branch individually gains
increasingly
bugfreeness during its individual
Nino
--
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
