On Wed, 06 Aug 2014 13:52:28 +0200
Sophie <[email protected]> wrote:
> Le 06/08/2014 13:00, Tom Davies a écrit :
> > Hi :)
> > Ok, so the question is why have 2 different branches at all?
> >
> > The "Fresh" branch has the advantage of having more features but
> > what advantage does the older branch have?
>
> To have less bugs and regressions that make it more sure to use by
> average users.
Which, by definition, makes it "more stable".
Hence why plenty of open source software uses the terminology of a
stable branch vs. "testing", "bleeding edge", "development", etc.
Some sites say that the bleeding edge is *not* stable, so be warned,
others say that the development branch is very stable, with more
features, but does have the potential for more bugs, and leave the
choice up to the end user.
Why don't we do the same? This is well established tradition that many
will be used to and understand, and those that aren't familiar with
it can be guided in their choice by a simple description.
In fact, the current download page has no description whatsoever,
making it extremely unfriendly when it also uses unfamiliar
terminology. Simply adding a description, and *not* making a ".0"
release the default choice, would go a long way towards making this
whole argument a little less relevant, although using standard
terminology as well is still the best way to go, by miles.
--
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
