Alex Thurgood wrote:
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
Thanks, Alex. You've got some complexity issues there for sure, and if
upgrading to 2.2.1 is what you recommend for data safety that's good
enough for me! Then I'll get 2.3 after it's been out a while to settle down.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
