On Thursday 30 August 2007 04:04:12 Barbara Duprey wrote: > Hi Barbara,
>>>> Yes, I really, really want to go to 2.3, but the site is still > >>>> offering 2.2.1 as the latest stable release and I'm not sure a > >>>> development build is what I want. So I seem to have these choices: > >>>> stick with 2.0.4 until 2.3 comes out and then upgrade; upgrade to > >>>> 2.2.1 and then to 2.3 in a few(?) days; upgrade to the latest 2.3 > >>>> development build and then to 2.3 when it's stable. Are you saying > >>>> that the latest 2.3 development build really is stable enough for > >>>> production work? If so, I'll gladly go to it. I'm on WinXP, us-en, so > >>>> the more arcane aspects of locale and so on don't really affect me. If you, like many of us, use OOo in production and need to rely on data safety as much as is humanly possible with the current release, then upgrade to 2.2.1 and wait for 2.3 to be declared stable. I test the dev builds alongside the stable releases, simply because I, like you, can't afford to have production data mangled by an app, and because I have a pool of heterogeneous OS running OOo at work (Linux, Mac, FreeBSD and the occasional Windows). We mainly have Kubuntu workstations, and they use the Kubuntu package prepared by that dev group (with all its faults and bugs, some of them very annoying to me, but my staff seem to get by). My problem is not of having the latest whingdiz features, but having an office suite that is overall stable (i.e. every module we use at work) and doesn't lose or reformat your data in unexpected ways (to the extent that such is possible with any software program :-) ) Alex --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
