On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 04:33:45PM -0400, Robinson Tryon wrote: > [cc'ing QA, as they might have some suggestions here...] > On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 12:16 PM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster > <webmas...@krackedpress.com> wrote:
>> I do not know that 4.1.0 would be the best to start a user on, >> personallythat is. Some would say 3.6.7 would be best for business users, >> but does it have theMSO XML format updates that 4.0.4 and maybe 4.1.0 have? >> Personally, I would tell peoplesomething like the following. >> 3.6.7 - the most conservative version >> 4.0.4 [4.0.5] - useful for most users >> 4.1.0 - for users that are early adopters for a version line > +1 >> There has always been a "sticking point" for me to see the download page >> default to an "early adopter" version, as named by the release plan page. > The more people on the early-adopter version, the faster we find bugs > and regressions. I think that if we make the tradeoffs clear, we'll > probably still have a large number of people grab the latest version > and help us find any remaining issues, but anyone who is more cautious > can stick with something from the previous Release series. See also https://bugs.freedesktop.org/67556 about user confusions about our versions in the context of the automatic "available update" notification. Our "vision" really needs to be "taught"; in the context of the update notification, I suggest we add a setting: - conservative - "most users" - early adopter and the setting screen should contain a brief explanation of the trade-offs. Right now, we "heuristically" say (for our update policy) that people using 3.6 are "conservative" (and propose them "only" 3.6.7), but really that's a (bad) heuristic; it should be a setting. >> Sure we would like to have people upgrade to 4.0.4 or 4.0.5, but I >> do not think we should have anyone think we will not support >> aprevious product line less than a month or two after its last >> version comes out. > IIRC, that's the timeline that ESC came up with. As I understand the > logic, the last few builds in a Release series are really just > maintenance releases containing bugfixes, etc... (*...) So instead > of thinking about it as dropping support a month after the last > build, think about it as dropping support 5 months after the 5th > build (X.x.4) in a series. Precisely. The last build is *by* *definition* the time when you drop the possibility for bugfixes. Releasing a bugfix needs a new build, so if you say "we may make a bugfix to 3.6.7", it means "we may make a 3.6.8" or in other words "3.6.7 may not be the last 3.6 build". -- Lionel _______________________________________________ List Name: Libreoffice-qa mailing list Mail address: Libreoffice-qa@lists.freedesktop.org Change settings: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-qa Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice-qa/
