Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
Well we really need to have an "easier" way for the users find the more "conservative" version of 3.6.5 when 3.7.0 comes out. I do not think anyone would call 3.7.0 the version a new user should try first over 3.6.5. SO we need a better and easier way for them to get to that install instead of the default 3.7.0 downloads. Since the question keeps coming up, and we should promote both lines of our 2 line development cycle, we need an easy way to display/access both lines at the same time like shown in http://www.libreoffice.org/download-more/ If we do not show BOTH lines in the "default" download page, how can we say we are promoting both of our development cycle lines? That is the key point really. If we do not promote both lines, then why bother with updating the older line or have it available when 3.7.0 comes out On 10/21/2012 10:08 AM, Charles-H. Schulz wrote: Hello Tim, We are actually not going to do that (see my previous mail in a new thread). In fact we already did discuss this ten times in the past, and I really would like to close this subject once and for all. Thank you, Charles. Le dimanche 21 octobre 2012 à 10:02 -0400, webmaster-Kracked_P_P a écrit : I think this thread has gone way beyond what the original posting was about. Yes, there is a point about calling a version "conservative" since a few people might see the name and think about their country's political party with that name. But the point is we are beyond using words like "more stable" in describing one line over the other. So it is time to move on and stop using this thread name. Maybe someone can start a new thread about how to describe the two lines for new users. When 3.7.0 comes out in Feb 2013, we will have the same questions being asked about which line a user should try "first". At that point 3.6.5 will be out as well. SO end this thread and someone start a new one about what words, terms, etc., are needed to help NEW users choose between the two lines. Then by the time 3.7.0 comes out, we might have an agreement on how we can better promote our two line development cycle and its packages. end-of-thread please. On 10/21/2012 08:43 AM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) Please give it a rest. I was just pointing out that 1 suggested name was the same name as a major political party. Accidentally calling things by names that have serious implications in certain places is something that we might be able to avoid unless we are not allowed to communicate with each other. Regards from Tom :) -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+h...@global.libreoffice.org 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/marketing/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
Hello Tim, We are actually not going to do that (see my previous mail in a new thread). In fact we already did discuss this ten times in the past, and I really would like to close this subject once and for all. Thank you, Charles. Le dimanche 21 octobre 2012 à 10:02 -0400, webmaster-Kracked_P_P a écrit : > I think this thread has gone way beyond what the original posting was about. > > Yes, there is a point about calling a version "conservative" since a few > people might see the name and think about their country's political > party with that name. But the point is we are beyond using words like > "more stable" in describing one line over the other. So it is time to > move on and stop using this thread name. > > Maybe someone can start a new thread about how to describe the two lines > for new users. When 3.7.0 comes out in Feb 2013, we will have the same > questions being asked about which line a user should try "first". At > that point 3.6.5 will be out as well. > > SO > end this thread and someone start a new one about what words, terms, > etc., are needed to help NEW users choose between the two lines. Then > by the time 3.7.0 comes out, we might have an agreement on how we can > better promote our two line development cycle and its packages. > > end-of-thread > please. > > On 10/21/2012 08:43 AM, Tom Davies wrote: > > Hi :) > > Please give it a rest. > > > > I was just pointing out that 1 suggested name was the same name as a major > > political party. Accidentally calling things by names that have serious > > implications in certain places is something that we might be able to avoid > > unless we are not allowed to communicate with each other. > > Regards from > > Tom :) > > > -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+h...@global.libreoffice.org 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/marketing/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
I think this thread has gone way beyond what the original posting was about. Yes, there is a point about calling a version "conservative" since a few people might see the name and think about their country's political party with that name. But the point is we are beyond using words like "more stable" in describing one line over the other. So it is time to move on and stop using this thread name. Maybe someone can start a new thread about how to describe the two lines for new users. When 3.7.0 comes out in Feb 2013, we will have the same questions being asked about which line a user should try "first". At that point 3.6.5 will be out as well. SO end this thread and someone start a new one about what words, terms, etc., are needed to help NEW users choose between the two lines. Then by the time 3.7.0 comes out, we might have an agreement on how we can better promote our two line development cycle and its packages. end-of-thread please. On 10/21/2012 08:43 AM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) Please give it a rest. I was just pointing out that 1 suggested name was the same name as a major political party. Accidentally calling things by names that have serious implications in certain places is something that we might be able to avoid unless we are not allowed to communicate with each other. Regards from Tom :) -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+h...@global.libreoffice.org 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/marketing/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
Hi :) Please give it a rest. I was just pointing out that 1 suggested name was the same name as a major political party. Accidentally calling things by names that have serious implications in certain places is something that we might be able to avoid unless we are not allowed to communicate with each other. Regards from Tom :) > > From: Charles-H. Schulz >To: marketing@global.libreoffice.org >Sent: Saturday, 20 October 2012, 11:45 >Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] >The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2 > >Tom, > >One very last time: please stop discussing politics and general opinions >that are fully unrelated to the purpose of this list. > >Thanks, > >Charles. > >Le samedi 20 octobre 2012 à 11:18 +0100, Tom Davies a écrit : >> Hi :) >> Hmm, with a capital C that has a very negative connotation in the country i >> am in. >> >> >> It's the name of the political party that is currently in power seemingly >> purely to drive this country into the dirt. It's 2 years until we get to >> vote in the opposing party so that they can drive us down instead or we >> might keep the current lot in to see just how much more damage they can do. >> [shrugs] >> >> >> If we use "conservative" then it's bound to get capitalised at some point. >> So, i think i would prefer using "Corporate" or something else. >> >> >> Regards from >> Tom :) >> >> >> >> >> >> >____________ >> > From: webmaster-Kracked_P_P >> >To: marketing@global.libreoffice.org >> >Sent: Friday, 19 October 2012, 12:39 >> >Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] >> >The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2 >> > >> > >> >I think calling the 3.5.x"previous" branch - i.e. 3.5.4 through 3.5.7 - >> >the "conservative branch" and the current versions of the 3.6.x >> >branch/line the "cutting edge branch". >> > >> >That gets rid of any "more stable" or other terminology that might be >> >seen as a negative image for either branch/line. >> > >> >I wonder if it would be possible to get that change made on the download >> >pages. >> > >> >We would have >> > >> >3.6.2 - latest Cutting Edge branch version >> > >> >3.5.7 - latest Conservative branch version >> > >> >3.6.3 - latest Pre-release version >> > >> >and later >> > >> > >> >3.6.4 - latest Cutting Edge branch version >> > >> >3.5.7 - final Conservative 3.5 branch version >> > >> >3.6.5 - latest Pre-release version >> > >> >3.7.0 - latest Pre-release of the new branch >> > >> > >> > >> >On 10/19/2012 03:59 AM, Tom Davies wrote: >> >> Hi :) >> >> +1 >> >> That is a +1 to all points. I think gold or blue or the orange suggested >> >> rather than red but that is a minor issue. >> >> >> >> I think that you might even get MORE people keen to test the new branch >> >> earlier in it's cycle because people often like to be ahead and it would >> >> make them less shy about exploring and reporting issues. We might even >> >> find that people use that as a route into triage. >> >> Regards from >> >> Tom :) >> >> >> >> >> >> --- On Fri, 19/10/12, Carlo Strata wrote: >> >> >> >> From: Carlo Strata >> >> Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: >> >> [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2 >> >> To: "marketing@global.libreoffice.org" >> >> Cc: "charles.sch...@documentfoundation.org" >> >> >> >> Date: Friday, 19 October, 2012, 8:43 >> >> >> >> Hi Everyone, >> >> >> >> I think we are all in the right way. :-) >> >> >> >> The only thing to do is let people (users) to know - from the start! - >> >> that there are two versions. >> >> >> >> In this way "someone with less computer skills" can directly choose >> >> either the conservative branch or fall back to it (and not to OpenOffice >> >> or something else...) if he initially choo
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
Tom, One very last time: please stop discussing politics and general opinions that are fully unrelated to the purpose of this list. Thanks, Charles. Le samedi 20 octobre 2012 à 11:18 +0100, Tom Davies a écrit : > Hi :) > Hmm, with a capital C that has a very negative connotation in the country i > am in. > > > It's the name of the political party that is currently in power seemingly > purely to drive this country into the dirt. It's 2 years until we get to > vote in the opposing party so that they can drive us down instead or we might > keep the current lot in to see just how much more damage they can do. > [shrugs] > > > If we use "conservative" then it's bound to get capitalised at some point. > So, i think i would prefer using "Corporate" or something else. > > > Regards from > Tom :) > > > > > > > > > From: webmaster-Kracked_P_P > >To: marketing@global.libreoffice.org > >Sent: Friday, 19 October 2012, 12:39 > >Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] > >The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2 > > > > > >I think calling the 3.5.x"previous" branch - i.e. 3.5.4 through 3.5.7 - > >the "conservative branch" and the current versions of the 3.6.x > >branch/line the "cutting edge branch". > > > >That gets rid of any "more stable" or other terminology that might be > >seen as a negative image for either branch/line. > > > >I wonder if it would be possible to get that change made on the download > >pages. > > > >We would have > > > >3.6.2 - latest Cutting Edge branch version > > > >3.5.7 - latest Conservative branch version > > > >3.6.3 - latest Pre-release version > > > >and later > > > > > >3.6.4 - latest Cutting Edge branch version > > > >3.5.7 - final Conservative 3.5 branch version > > > >3.6.5 - latest Pre-release version > > > >3.7.0 - latest Pre-release of the new branch > > > > > > > >On 10/19/2012 03:59 AM, Tom Davies wrote: > >> Hi :) > >> +1 > >> That is a +1 to all points. I think gold or blue or the orange suggested > >> rather than red but that is a minor issue. > >> > >> I think that you might even get MORE people keen to test the new branch > >> earlier in it's cycle because people often like to be ahead and it would > >> make them less shy about exploring and reporting issues. We might even > >> find that people use that as a route into triage. > >> Regards from > >> Tom :) > >> > >> > >> --- On Fri, 19/10/12, Carlo Strata wrote: > >> > >> From: Carlo Strata > >> Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: > >> [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2 > >> To: "marketing@global.libreoffice.org" > >> Cc: "charles.sch...@documentfoundation.org" > >> > >> Date: Friday, 19 October, 2012, 8:43 > >> > >> Hi Everyone, > >> > >> I think we are all in the right way. :-) > >> > >> The only thing to do is let people (users) to know - from the start! - > >> that there are two versions. > >> > >> In this way "someone with less computer skills" can directly choose either > >> the conservative branch or fall back to it (and not to OpenOffice or > >> something else...) if he initially choose the newer feature richer one. > >> "Someone with less computer skills" cannot imagine or suspect that there > >> could be a conservative branch if you does not present to him immediately > >> and clearly. > >> > >> Some policies could be: > >> - [until 3.6.4] first order 3.5.7 "green circle" and second order 3.6.2 > >> "orange circle"; > >> - [since 3.6.4] first order 3.6.4 "green circle" and second order 3.5.7 > >> "green (old) circle"; > >> - [when 3.7.0 will be released] first order 3.6.6 "green circle" and > >> second order 3.7.0 "orange (red) circle"; > >> - and so on... > >> > >> These are similar to the current "Release Notes" page or the > >> "Pre-Releases" last and recent one... > >> > >> That may be very useful to join our common efforts to develop, support, > >> spread, ... Libr
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
Hi :) Hmm, with a capital C that has a very negative connotation in the country i am in. It's the name of the political party that is currently in power seemingly purely to drive this country into the dirt. It's 2 years until we get to vote in the opposing party so that they can drive us down instead or we might keep the current lot in to see just how much more damage they can do. [shrugs] If we use "conservative" then it's bound to get capitalised at some point. So, i think i would prefer using "Corporate" or something else. Regards from Tom :) > > From: webmaster-Kracked_P_P >To: marketing@global.libreoffice.org >Sent: Friday, 19 October 2012, 12:39 >Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] >The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2 > > >I think calling the 3.5.x"previous" branch - i.e. 3.5.4 through 3.5.7 - >the "conservative branch" and the current versions of the 3.6.x >branch/line the "cutting edge branch". > >That gets rid of any "more stable" or other terminology that might be >seen as a negative image for either branch/line. > >I wonder if it would be possible to get that change made on the download >pages. > >We would have > >3.6.2 - latest Cutting Edge branch version > >3.5.7 - latest Conservative branch version > >3.6.3 - latest Pre-release version > >and later > > >3.6.4 - latest Cutting Edge branch version > >3.5.7 - final Conservative 3.5 branch version > >3.6.5 - latest Pre-release version > >3.7.0 - latest Pre-release of the new branch > > > >On 10/19/2012 03:59 AM, Tom Davies wrote: >> Hi :) >> +1 >> That is a +1 to all points. I think gold or blue or the orange suggested >> rather than red but that is a minor issue. >> >> I think that you might even get MORE people keen to test the new branch >> earlier in it's cycle because people often like to be ahead and it would >> make them less shy about exploring and reporting issues. We might even find >> that people use that as a route into triage. >> Regards from >> Tom :) >> >> >> --- On Fri, 19/10/12, Carlo Strata wrote: >> >> From: Carlo Strata >> Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] >> The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2 >> To: "marketing@global.libreoffice.org" >> Cc: "charles.sch...@documentfoundation.org" >> >> Date: Friday, 19 October, 2012, 8:43 >> >> Hi Everyone, >> >> I think we are all in the right way. :-) >> >> The only thing to do is let people (users) to know - from the start! - that >> there are two versions. >> >> In this way "someone with less computer skills" can directly choose either >> the conservative branch or fall back to it (and not to OpenOffice or >> something else...) if he initially choose the newer feature richer one. >> "Someone with less computer skills" cannot imagine or suspect that there >> could be a conservative branch if you does not present to him immediately >> and clearly. >> >> Some policies could be: >> - [until 3.6.4] first order 3.5.7 "green circle" and second order 3.6.2 >> "orange circle"; >> - [since 3.6.4] first order 3.6.4 "green circle" and second order 3.5.7 >> "green (old) circle"; >> - [when 3.7.0 will be released] first order 3.6.6 "green circle" and second >> order 3.7.0 "orange (red) circle"; >> - and so on... >> >> These are similar to the current "Release Notes" page or the "Pre-Releases" >> last and recent one... >> >> That may be very useful to join our common efforts to develop, support, >> spread, ... LibreOffice in the World and not to frustrate or to nullify our >> at-Customer work! >> >> If you want to reaches many people you must think to many needs: but don't >> worry many people in any case will be curios and always test the first >> releases from start making them better and better as soon as possible. Don't >> worry: you - we! - will not loose testers and suggesters any more!!! >> >> Have a nice day, >> >> Carlo >> >> -- >> ing. Carlo Strata >> - >> via Botticelli 1/4 >> 30031 Dolo - VE >> Italia - Italy >> - >> tel./fax +39.041.822.0665 >> cell. +39.347.85.69.824 >> skype carlo.strata >> - >> carlo.str...@tiscali.it &
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
I think calling the 3.5.x"previous" branch - i.e. 3.5.4 through 3.5.7 - the "conservative branch" and the current versions of the 3.6.x branch/line the "cutting edge branch". That gets rid of any "more stable" or other terminology that might be seen as a negative image for either branch/line. I wonder if it would be possible to get that change made on the download pages. We would have 3.6.2 - latest Cutting Edge branch version 3.5.7 - latest Conservative branch version 3.6.3 - latest Pre-release version and later 3.6.4 - latest Cutting Edge branch version 3.5.7 - final Conservative 3.5 branch version 3.6.5 - latest Pre-release version 3.7.0 - latest Pre-release of the new branch On 10/19/2012 03:59 AM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) +1 That is a +1 to all points. I think gold or blue or the orange suggested rather than red but that is a minor issue. I think that you might even get MORE people keen to test the new branch earlier in it's cycle because people often like to be ahead and it would make them less shy about exploring and reporting issues. We might even find that people use that as a route into triage. Regards from Tom :) --- On Fri, 19/10/12, Carlo Strata wrote: From: Carlo Strata Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2 To: "marketing@global.libreoffice.org" Cc: "charles.sch...@documentfoundation.org" Date: Friday, 19 October, 2012, 8:43 Hi Everyone, I think we are all in the right way. :-) The only thing to do is let people (users) to know - from the start! - that there are two versions. In this way "someone with less computer skills" can directly choose either the conservative branch or fall back to it (and not to OpenOffice or something else...) if he initially choose the newer feature richer one. "Someone with less computer skills" cannot imagine or suspect that there could be a conservative branch if you does not present to him immediately and clearly. Some policies could be: - [until 3.6.4] first order 3.5.7 "green circle" and second order 3.6.2 "orange circle"; - [since 3.6.4] first order 3.6.4 "green circle" and second order 3.5.7 "green (old) circle"; - [when 3.7.0 will be released] first order 3.6.6 "green circle" and second order 3.7.0 "orange (red) circle"; - and so on... These are similar to the current "Release Notes" page or the "Pre-Releases" last and recent one... That may be very useful to join our common efforts to develop, support, spread, ... LibreOffice in the World and not to frustrate or to nullify our at-Customer work! If you want to reaches many people you must think to many needs: but don't worry many people in any case will be curios and always test the first releases from start making them better and better as soon as possible. Don't worry: you - we! - will not loose testers and suggesters any more!!! Have a nice day, Carlo -- ing. Carlo Strata - via Botticelli 1/4 30031 Dolo - VE Italia - Italy - tel./fax +39.041.822.0665 cell. +39.347.85.69.824 skype carlo.strata - carlo.str...@tiscali.it PEC: carlo.str...@ingpec.eu Il 04/10/2012 23.45, Cor Nouws ha scritto: Hi, Tom Davies wrote (04-10-12 20:28) Hi :) Seriously. What is the reason for having 2 branches? [...] Ah well, who am I to say that you can't understand it. Though the way this thread was started, does not show much (will for) understanding, IMHO. But OK, brief... - In each LibreOffice series, over the various minor releases, hundreds of bugs are fixed. Bugs that have their origin in the inherited OOo code (registered alone there were many thousands). Bugs that have been introduced by making new features. Bugs that have been introduced by improvements in code, performance. Bugs that have become visible because other bugs were fixed. Bugs from external reasons, bugs from .. - What is a simple annoyance for the one user, someone knowing ways to work around it in ample seconds, can be a serious bug for someone with less computer skills. - Simply having two series, allows people and (smaller) organisations that can handle bugs (...) more easily, to use the newer versions and benefit from the improvements and new features that it offers. And it allows them to help with further improvements in that series of LibreOffice, so that at a certain time it will be ready for more conservative, more careful, users and organisations. I tend to do nearly all my professional work (quotations, presentations, reports, mailings ...) in beta's/ dailies / developer builds. It's rare that that gives me too much trouble, or causes lost of work. It does cause me spending time on trying reporting carefully written bug-reports ;-) But that's only me, and there's of course many funct
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
Hi :) +1 That is a +1 to all points. I think gold or blue or the orange suggested rather than red but that is a minor issue. I think that you might even get MORE people keen to test the new branch earlier in it's cycle because people often like to be ahead and it would make them less shy about exploring and reporting issues. We might even find that people use that as a route into triage. Regards from Tom :) --- On Fri, 19/10/12, Carlo Strata wrote: From: Carlo Strata Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2 To: "marketing@global.libreoffice.org" Cc: "charles.sch...@documentfoundation.org" Date: Friday, 19 October, 2012, 8:43 Hi Everyone, I think we are all in the right way. :-) The only thing to do is let people (users) to know - from the start! - that there are two versions. In this way "someone with less computer skills" can directly choose either the conservative branch or fall back to it (and not to OpenOffice or something else...) if he initially choose the newer feature richer one. "Someone with less computer skills" cannot imagine or suspect that there could be a conservative branch if you does not present to him immediately and clearly. Some policies could be: - [until 3.6.4] first order 3.5.7 "green circle" and second order 3.6.2 "orange circle"; - [since 3.6.4] first order 3.6.4 "green circle" and second order 3.5.7 "green (old) circle"; - [when 3.7.0 will be released] first order 3.6.6 "green circle" and second order 3.7.0 "orange (red) circle"; - and so on... These are similar to the current "Release Notes" page or the "Pre-Releases" last and recent one... That may be very useful to join our common efforts to develop, support, spread, ... LibreOffice in the World and not to frustrate or to nullify our at-Customer work! If you want to reaches many people you must think to many needs: but don't worry many people in any case will be curios and always test the first releases from start making them better and better as soon as possible. Don't worry: you - we! - will not loose testers and suggesters any more!!! Have a nice day, Carlo -- ing. Carlo Strata - via Botticelli 1/4 30031 Dolo - VE Italia - Italy - tel./fax +39.041.822.0665 cell. +39.347.85.69.824 skype carlo.strata - carlo.str...@tiscali.it PEC: carlo.str...@ingpec.eu Il 04/10/2012 23.45, Cor Nouws ha scritto: > Hi, > > Tom Davies wrote (04-10-12 20:28) >> Hi :) Seriously. What is the reason for having 2 branches? >> [...] > > Ah well, who am I to say that you can't understand it. Though the way > this thread was started, does not show much (will for) understanding, > IMHO. But OK, brief... > > - In each LibreOffice series, over the various minor releases, > hundreds of bugs are fixed. > Bugs that have their origin in the inherited OOo code (registered > alone there were many thousands). Bugs that have been introduced by > making new features. Bugs that have been introduced by improvements in > code, performance. Bugs that have become visible because other bugs > were fixed. Bugs from external reasons, bugs from .. > - What is a simple annoyance for the one user, someone knowing ways to > work around it in ample seconds, can be a serious bug for someone with > less computer skills. > - Simply having two series, allows people and (smaller) organisations > that can handle bugs (...) more easily, to use the newer versions and > benefit from the improvements and new features that it offers. > And it allows them to help with further improvements in that series of > LibreOffice, so that at a certain time it will be ready for more > conservative, more careful, users and organisations. > > I tend to do nearly all my professional work (quotations, > presentations, reports, mailings ...) in beta's/ dailies / developer > builds. It's rare that that gives me too much trouble, or causes lost > of work. It does cause me spending time on trying reporting carefully > written bug-reports ;-) But that's only me, and there's of course > many functions that I only touch seldom or not at all. > > Cheers, > > -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+h...@global.libreoffice.org 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/marketing/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+h...@global.libreoffice.org 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/marketing/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
Hi Everyone, I think we are all in the right way. :-) The only thing to do is let people (users) to know - from the start! - that there are two versions. In this way "someone with less computer skills" can directly choose either the conservative branch or fall back to it (and not to OpenOffice or something else...) if he initially choose the newer feature richer one. "Someone with less computer skills" cannot imagine or suspect that there could be a conservative branch if you does not present to him immediately and clearly. Some policies could be: - [until 3.6.4] first order 3.5.7 "green circle" and second order 3.6.2 "orange circle"; - [since 3.6.4] first order 3.6.4 "green circle" and second order 3.5.7 "green (old) circle"; - [when 3.7.0 will be released] first order 3.6.6 "green circle" and second order 3.7.0 "orange (red) circle"; - and so on... These are similar to the current "Release Notes" page or the "Pre-Releases" last and recent one... That may be very useful to join our common efforts to develop, support, spread, ... LibreOffice in the World and not to frustrate or to nullify our at-Customer work! If you want to reaches many people you must think to many needs: but don't worry many people in any case will be curios and always test the first releases from start making them better and better as soon as possible. Don't worry: you - we! - will not loose testers and suggesters any more!!! Have a nice day, Carlo -- ing. Carlo Strata - via Botticelli 1/4 30031 Dolo - VE Italia - Italy - tel./fax +39.041.822.0665 cell. +39.347.85.69.824 skype carlo.strata - carlo.str...@tiscali.it PEC: carlo.str...@ingpec.eu Il 04/10/2012 23.45, Cor Nouws ha scritto: Hi, Tom Davies wrote (04-10-12 20:28) Hi :) Seriously. What is the reason for having 2 branches? [...] Ah well, who am I to say that you can't understand it. Though the way this thread was started, does not show much (will for) understanding, IMHO. But OK, brief... - In each LibreOffice series, over the various minor releases, hundreds of bugs are fixed. Bugs that have their origin in the inherited OOo code (registered alone there were many thousands). Bugs that have been introduced by making new features. Bugs that have been introduced by improvements in code, performance. Bugs that have become visible because other bugs were fixed. Bugs from external reasons, bugs from .. - What is a simple annoyance for the one user, someone knowing ways to work around it in ample seconds, can be a serious bug for someone with less computer skills. - Simply having two series, allows people and (smaller) organisations that can handle bugs (...) more easily, to use the newer versions and benefit from the improvements and new features that it offers. And it allows them to help with further improvements in that series of LibreOffice, so that at a certain time it will be ready for more conservative, more careful, users and organisations. I tend to do nearly all my professional work (quotations, presentations, reports, mailings ...) in beta's/ dailies / developer builds. It's rare that that gives me too much trouble, or causes lost of work. It does cause me spending time on trying reporting carefully written bug-reports ;-) But that's only me, and there's of course many functions that I only touch seldom or not at all. Cheers, -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+h...@global.libreoffice.org 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/marketing/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
It knocks the socks off MS Office. There does tend to be quite a > spike around the release of the new series until it reaches around 3.x.4. > However, i overhear more grumbles about MS Office from MS-fanboys in my > little town than i hear from LO's international, global, world-spanning users > support list in the course of an average day. > > Also bear in mind that "you can't make omelettes without breaking eggs". LO > makes huge improvements all the time and in many ways already surpasses MS > Office in terms of quality of final documents produced and ease of producing > them. You cannot imagine how true your words are... LibreOffice builds on a legacy of 10 million lines of code, and everytime we remove or change something, weird things happen. But we'll get through that eventually. Charles. > > Regards from > Tom :) > > > --- On Thu, 4/10/12, Cor Nouws wrote: > > From: Cor Nouws > Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] > The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2 > To: "marketing@global.libreoffice.org" > Cc: "charles.sch...@documentfoundation.org" > > Date: Thursday, 4 October, 2012, 22:45 > > Hi, > > Tom Davies wrote (04-10-12 20:28) > > Hi :) Seriously. What is the reason for having 2 branches? > > [...] > > Ah well, who am I to say that you can't understand it. Though the way this > thread was started, does not show much (will for) understanding, IMHO. But > OK, brief... > > - In each LibreOffice series, over the various minor releases, hundreds of > bugs are fixed. > Bugs that have their origin in the inherited OOo code (registered alone there > were many thousands). Bugs that have been introduced by making new features. > Bugs that have been introduced by improvements in code, performance. Bugs > that have become visible because other bugs were fixed. Bugs from external > reasons, bugs from .. > - What is a simple annoyance for the one user, someone knowing ways to work > around it in ample seconds, can be a serious bug for someone with less > computer skills. > - Simply having two series, allows people and (smaller) organisations that > can handle bugs (...) more easily, to use the newer versions and benefit from > the improvements and new features that it offers. > And it allows them to help with further improvements in that series of > LibreOffice, so that at a certain time it will be ready for more > conservative, more careful, users and organisations. > > I tend to do nearly all my professional work (quotations, presentations, > reports, mailings ...) in beta's/ dailies / developer builds. It's rare that > that gives me too much trouble, or causes lost of work. It does cause me > spending time on trying reporting carefully written bug-reports ;-) But > that's only me, and there's of course many functions that I only touch seldom > or not at all. > > Cheers, > > > -- - Cor > - http://nl.libreoffice.org > - www.librelex.org > > > -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+h...@global.libreoffice.org > 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/marketing/ > All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted > > -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+h...@global.libreoffice.org 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/marketing/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
Hi :) I'm sorry but that only seems to confirm what i have been saying :( Obviously i am wrong but where is my mistake? When you say 1. "In each LibreOffice series, over the various minor releases, hundreds of bugs are fixed." it suggests, to me, that 'hundreds' of bugs are found at the beginning of a series. Would that be around the 3.x.0, 3.x.1, 3.x.2 and 3.x.3? The "various minor releases" are that 3rd figure? So as that 3rd figure increases the number of fixed bugs increases? So as we get to the .4s, .5s and onwards there are usually less bugs that cause problems? 2. "Bugs that have been introduced by making new features." When do new features get added? In my stupidity i have assumed that new features are mostly added at the beginning of the series, in the 3.x.0 release, maybe some in the 3.x.1 if they were not quite ready in time or some last minute hiccup meant they couldn't be active in the .0. However i could be completely wrong. Are a roughly equal amount of new features added at each "minor release"? or is the .0 chosen as the best time to incorporate a load of new features? 3. The rest of the paragraph seems to be things that both branches have in common. "Bugs that have been introduced by improvements in code, performance. Bugs that have become visible because other bugs were fixed. Bugs from external reasons, bugs from .. - What is a simple annoyance for the one user, someone knowing ways to work around it in ample seconds, can be a serious bug for someone with less computer skills.". Possibly a bit more at the start of a series and at the start (the .0s, .1s) perhaps also affecting reasonably skilled users that perhaps aren't LO devs. But basically that paragraph-fragment seems to cover all minor-point releases including the first. 4. "allows people ... that can handle bugs (...) more easily, to use the newer versions and benefit from the improvements and new features that it offers." Are these newer versions the start of the series? (the .0s, .1s, .2s?) Or is that referring to every minor-point release? 5. "so that at a certain time it will be ready for more conservative, more careful, users and organisations.". Does this mean that more conservative users should not use LO at all until the series has settled down or do they just have to suffer through the problems of the early minor-point releases in the series or might they be better staying with the older branch's more recent minor-point releases such as the .4s, .5s, .6s? See? I think this point 5 is where i am going wrong. I have been thinking that it's better for "conservative, more careful, users" to stick with the older branches latest releases. Obviously (to you and Charles) i am wrong and there is no need for the older branch. Or is there? Just to make it clear to anyone new that i DO NOT often find any problems with LO. It knocks the socks off MS Office. There does tend to be quite a spike around the release of the new series until it reaches around 3.x.4. However, i overhear more grumbles about MS Office from MS-fanboys in my little town than i hear from LO's international, global, world-spanning users support list in the course of an average day. Also bear in mind that "you can't make omelettes without breaking eggs". LO makes huge improvements all the time and in many ways already surpasses MS Office in terms of quality of final documents produced and ease of producing them. Regards from Tom :) --- On Thu, 4/10/12, Cor Nouws wrote: From: Cor Nouws Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2 To: "marketing@global.libreoffice.org" Cc: "charles.sch...@documentfoundation.org" Date: Thursday, 4 October, 2012, 22:45 Hi, Tom Davies wrote (04-10-12 20:28) > Hi :) Seriously. What is the reason for having 2 branches? > [...] Ah well, who am I to say that you can't understand it. Though the way this thread was started, does not show much (will for) understanding, IMHO. But OK, brief... - In each LibreOffice series, over the various minor releases, hundreds of bugs are fixed. Bugs that have their origin in the inherited OOo code (registered alone there were many thousands). Bugs that have been introduced by making new features. Bugs that have been introduced by improvements in code, performance. Bugs that have become visible because other bugs were fixed. Bugs from external reasons, bugs from .. - What is a simple annoyance for the one user, someone knowing ways to work around it in ample seconds, can be a serious bug for someone with less computer skills. - Simply having two series, allows people and (smaller) organisations that can handle bugs (...) more easily, to use the
RE: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
Hi Tom, at some level i agree with you, having 2 branches does not make much sense, specially for desktop applications such as libreoffice. It will confuse people who do not read which version is applicable for which environment. In marketing the way I have seen such situations handled is having 2 different sub-brands, for e.g., MS Office Home Edition and MS Office Professional. However having 2 sub-brands has serious impact on spending, to increase awareness of different features and increase sales for both brands. And product licenses also get impacted (no. of copies allowed, support provided etc) which requires approval from legal teams. Bottom line, its a business decision to introduce 2 sub-brands, and then let marketing (and all other teams) plan to support both of them. It seems TDF board has made the decision to keep one brand which is great for many reasons (cost being one of them). Also, not all software sells through LGPL, so if those companies sell software with known bugs, they might have significant liability later, or they may not get paid for software maintenance and so on. With LO, having 2 branches is good for engineering, where you can have regressions fixed in the stable branch and code back merged from the features added to the main line at a later date. However, this mechanism presupposes that the stable branch is getting more QA cycles, and consequently has more stability, which is the "selling point" of the stable branch. So this message will be very useful for all engineers working on LO who drive the improvements in the product. Unless you have SAAS deployments, product versioning and subsequent upgrades are a de facto engineering process, which marketing team must accept and plan for. Quibbling about the "quality" of different versions of LO is largely pointless. You can ping me offline if you need more examples of "why we do things the way we do" regards Dhiren > Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 23:45:46 +0200 > From: oo...@nouenoff.nl > To: marketing@global.libreoffice.org > CC: charles.sch...@documentfoundation.org > Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] > The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2 > > Hi, > > Tom Davies wrote (04-10-12 20:28) > > Hi :) Seriously. What is the reason for having 2 branches? > > [...] > > Ah well, who am I to say that you can't understand it. Though the way > this thread was started, does not show much (will for) understanding, > IMHO. But OK, brief... > > - In each LibreOffice series, over the various minor releases, hundreds > of bugs are fixed. > Bugs that have their origin in the inherited OOo code (registered alone > there were many thousands). Bugs that have been introduced by making new > features. Bugs that have been introduced by improvements in code, > performance. Bugs that have become visible because other bugs were > fixed. Bugs from external reasons, bugs from .. > - What is a simple annoyance for the one user, someone knowing ways to > work around it in ample seconds, can be a serious bug for someone with > less computer skills. > - Simply having two series, allows people and (smaller) organisations > that can handle bugs (...) more easily, to use the newer versions and > benefit from the improvements and new features that it offers. > And it allows them to help with further improvements in that series of > LibreOffice, so that at a certain time it will be ready for more > conservative, more careful, users and organisations. > > I tend to do nearly all my professional work (quotations, presentations, > reports, mailings ...) in beta's/ dailies / developer builds. It's rare > that that gives me too much trouble, or causes lost of work. It does > cause me spending time on trying reporting carefully written bug-reports > ;-) But that's only me, and there's of course many functions that I > only touch seldom or not at all. > > Cheers, > > > -- > - Cor > - http://nl.libreoffice.org > - www.librelex.org > > > -- > Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+h...@global.libreoffice.org > 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/marketing/ > All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted > -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+h...@global.libreoffice.org 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/marketing/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
Hi, Tom Davies wrote (04-10-12 20:28) Hi :) Seriously. What is the reason for having 2 branches? [...] Ah well, who am I to say that you can't understand it. Though the way this thread was started, does not show much (will for) understanding, IMHO. But OK, brief... - In each LibreOffice series, over the various minor releases, hundreds of bugs are fixed. Bugs that have their origin in the inherited OOo code (registered alone there were many thousands). Bugs that have been introduced by making new features. Bugs that have been introduced by improvements in code, performance. Bugs that have become visible because other bugs were fixed. Bugs from external reasons, bugs from .. - What is a simple annoyance for the one user, someone knowing ways to work around it in ample seconds, can be a serious bug for someone with less computer skills. - Simply having two series, allows people and (smaller) organisations that can handle bugs (...) more easily, to use the newer versions and benefit from the improvements and new features that it offers. And it allows them to help with further improvements in that series of LibreOffice, so that at a certain time it will be ready for more conservative, more careful, users and organisations. I tend to do nearly all my professional work (quotations, presentations, reports, mailings ...) in beta's/ dailies / developer builds. It's rare that that gives me too much trouble, or causes lost of work. It does cause me spending time on trying reporting carefully written bug-reports ;-) But that's only me, and there's of course many functions that I only touch seldom or not at all. Cheers, -- - Cor - http://nl.libreoffice.org - www.librelex.org -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+h...@global.libreoffice.org 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/marketing/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
Hi :) Personal attacks are sooo clever. Now we all understand so much more. Regards from Tom :) > > From: Cor Nouws >To: "marketing@global.libreoffice.org" >Cc: "charles.sch...@documentfoundation.org" > >Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2012, 19:19 >Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] >The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2 > >Let's look at this from the bright side: >it's good to have a joker in a project. > >Cheers, >Cor > >Tom Davies wrote (04-10-12 20:12) >> Hi :) >> Ok, so what is the reason for having 2 branches being developed at the same >> time. Try to explain it again and i will try to listen. >> Regards from >> Tom :) > > >-- - Cor >- http://nl.libreoffice.org >- www.librelex.org > > >-- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+h...@global.libreoffice.org >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/marketing/ >All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted > > > > -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+h...@global.libreoffice.org 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/marketing/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
Hi :) Seriously. What is the reason for having 2 branches? From Charles', Italo's and your answers so far in this thread there is no reason. So why are the devs wasting their time on the 3.5.x branch? Regards from Tom :) > > From: Cor Nouws >To: "marketing@global.libreoffice.org" >Cc: "charles.sch...@documentfoundation.org" > >Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2012, 19:19 >Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] >The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2 > >Let's look at this from the bright side: >it's good to have a joker in a project. > >Cheers, >Cor > >Tom Davies wrote (04-10-12 20:12) >> Hi :) >> Ok, so what is the reason for having 2 branches being developed at the same >> time. Try to explain it again and i will try to listen. >> Regards from >> Tom :) > > >-- - Cor >- http://nl.libreoffice.org >- www.librelex.org > > >-- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+h...@global.libreoffice.org >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/marketing/ >All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted > > > > -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+h...@global.libreoffice.org 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/marketing/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
Let's look at this from the bright side: it's good to have a joker in a project. Cheers, Cor Tom Davies wrote (04-10-12 20:12) Hi :) Ok, so what is the reason for having 2 branches being developed at the same time. Try to explain it again and i will try to listen. Regards from Tom :) -- - Cor - http://nl.libreoffice.org - www.librelex.org -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+h...@global.libreoffice.org 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/marketing/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
Hi :) Ok, so what is the reason for having 2 branches being developed at the same time. Try to explain it again and i will try to listen. Regards from Tom :) > > From: Charles-H. Schulz >To: "marketing@global.libreoffice.org" >Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2012, 18:25 >Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] >The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2 > > >Charles. >Le 4 oct. 2012 19:16, "Tom Davies" a écrit : > >> Hi :) >> When the new 3.5.7 is released is that going to be sold as "contains tons >> more newer features and greater compatibility with other formats"? >> Regards from >> Tom :) >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> > From: webmaster-Kracked_P_P >> >To: marketing@global.libreoffice.org >> >Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2012, 14:41 >> >Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: >> [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2 >> > >> > >> >The key would be to ask yourself which version would you give your local >> >government office, or largest business in your community, to use. Would >> >you give them 3.5.6 or the brand new 3.6.2 version? >> > >> >Even our own Release Plan page tells us that ".2 or .3 Early adopters" >> >on the graph. >> > >> >Sure, there are many improvements in the latest 3.6.x line, but would >> >you stake the "company's" rep. on it? Which current version has the >> >least issues to deal with? Which version has had the most work done to >> >fix the bugs and other issues? Which version is for "critical >> >applications"? Those are the things that must be answered. >> > >> >Next week 3.5.7 comes out, which is the last of that line. 3.6.3 comes >> >out the first week of November and 3.6.4 come out the first week of >> >December. >> > >> >I think the real problem is how we may assume that people will always >> >want to try 3.6.x line while it still is in an "early adopter" stage. >> >The download page seems to assume that. Many of us would lake to see >> >that change. >> > >> >As for Press Releases announcing the newest version of the 3.6.x line, >> >it is a good thing. The only thing we should state somewhere is that >> >there is another line for the "critical application user" if they do not >> >want to use the "more cutting edge" line. >> > >> >We have two lines and should be proud of that concept. If not, then we >> >should drop the two line development cycle. >> > >> >I run 3.5.6 and will be moving to 3.5.7, BUT I am waiting till 3.6.4 or >> >3.6.5 before I make the move over to the 3.6.x line for my default >> >desktop. I may try it on one of my laptops, but not the desktop[s]. >> > >> >Was that not the reason for the two lines? You run the previous line >> >till the newest one gets to the point where it is ready for "all users" >> >and their "critical applications"? That is one reason why I still run >> >the previous line till the newest one gets to the ".4" or ".5" version. >> >That is the way the development cycle was set up. >> > >> > >> >On 10/04/2012 08:54 AM, Charles-H. Schulz wrote: >> >> Public announcements are obviously marketing. Someone repeatedly >> >> complaining that software comes with bugs on the marketing list is not >> >> related to marketing. >> >> >> >> Charles. >> >> Le 4 oct. 2012 14:48, "Tom Davies" a écrit : >> >> >> >>> Hi :) >> >>> Ahh, sorry. I didn't realise that public announcements and press >> releases >> >>> have nothing to do with marketing. >> >>> Apols and regards from >> >>> Tom :) >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>>> >> >>>> From: Charles-H. Schulz >> >>>> To: "marketing@global.libreoffice.org" < >> marketing@global.libreoffice.org> >> >>>> Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2012, 13:30 >> >>>> Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: >> >>> [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
Charles. Le 4 oct. 2012 19:16, "Tom Davies" a écrit : > Hi :) > When the new 3.5.7 is released is that going to be sold as "contains tons > more newer features and greater compatibility with other formats"? > Regards from > Tom :) > > > > > > > > > From: webmaster-Kracked_P_P > >To: marketing@global.libreoffice.org > >Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2012, 14:41 > >Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: > [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2 > > > > > >The key would be to ask yourself which version would you give your local > >government office, or largest business in your community, to use. Would > >you give them 3.5.6 or the brand new 3.6.2 version? > > > >Even our own Release Plan page tells us that ".2 or .3 Early adopters" > >on the graph. > > > >Sure, there are many improvements in the latest 3.6.x line, but would > >you stake the "company's" rep. on it? Which current version has the > >least issues to deal with? Which version has had the most work done to > >fix the bugs and other issues? Which version is for "critical > >applications"? Those are the things that must be answered. > > > >Next week 3.5.7 comes out, which is the last of that line. 3.6.3 comes > >out the first week of November and 3.6.4 come out the first week of > >December. > > > >I think the real problem is how we may assume that people will always > >want to try 3.6.x line while it still is in an "early adopter" stage. > >The download page seems to assume that. Many of us would lake to see > >that change. > > > >As for Press Releases announcing the newest version of the 3.6.x line, > >it is a good thing. The only thing we should state somewhere is that > >there is another line for the "critical application user" if they do not > >want to use the "more cutting edge" line. > > > >We have two lines and should be proud of that concept. If not, then we > >should drop the two line development cycle. > > > >I run 3.5.6 and will be moving to 3.5.7, BUT I am waiting till 3.6.4 or > >3.6.5 before I make the move over to the 3.6.x line for my default > >desktop. I may try it on one of my laptops, but not the desktop[s]. > > > >Was that not the reason for the two lines? You run the previous line > >till the newest one gets to the point where it is ready for "all users" > >and their "critical applications"? That is one reason why I still run > >the previous line till the newest one gets to the ".4" or ".5" version. > >That is the way the development cycle was set up. > > > > > >On 10/04/2012 08:54 AM, Charles-H. Schulz wrote: > >> Public announcements are obviously marketing. Someone repeatedly > >> complaining that software comes with bugs on the marketing list is not > >> related to marketing. > >> > >> Charles. > >> Le 4 oct. 2012 14:48, "Tom Davies" a écrit : > >> > >>> Hi :) > >>> Ahh, sorry. I didn't realise that public announcements and press > releases > >>> have nothing to do with marketing. > >>> Apols and regards from > >>> Tom :) > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> > >>>> From: Charles-H. Schulz > >>>> To: "marketing@global.libreoffice.org" < > marketing@global.libreoffice.org> > >>>> Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2012, 13:30 > >>>> Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: > >>> [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2 > >>>> Tom, > >>>> > >>>> The points you are making are repeated at each release. I cannot > really > >>>> help if you refuse to understand how we work or how software > development > >>>> works. But as we are on the marketing list we need to work on > marketing > >>> and > >>>> not lose our time with recurring rants that are not related to > marketing. > >>>> > >>>> We must discipline ourselves if we are on this list and post on it: we > >>> work > >>>> on marketing and stay focused on it. > >>>> > >>>> Thank you for your understanding. > >>>> > >>>> Charles. > >>>>
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
Hi :) When the new 3.5.7 is released is that going to be sold as "contains tons more newer features and greater compatibility with other formats"? Regards from Tom :) > > From: webmaster-Kracked_P_P >To: marketing@global.libreoffice.org >Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2012, 14:41 >Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] >The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2 > > >The key would be to ask yourself which version would you give your local >government office, or largest business in your community, to use. Would >you give them 3.5.6 or the brand new 3.6.2 version? > >Even our own Release Plan page tells us that ".2 or .3 Early adopters" >on the graph. > >Sure, there are many improvements in the latest 3.6.x line, but would >you stake the "company's" rep. on it? Which current version has the >least issues to deal with? Which version has had the most work done to >fix the bugs and other issues? Which version is for "critical >applications"? Those are the things that must be answered. > >Next week 3.5.7 comes out, which is the last of that line. 3.6.3 comes >out the first week of November and 3.6.4 come out the first week of >December. > >I think the real problem is how we may assume that people will always >want to try 3.6.x line while it still is in an "early adopter" stage. >The download page seems to assume that. Many of us would lake to see >that change. > >As for Press Releases announcing the newest version of the 3.6.x line, >it is a good thing. The only thing we should state somewhere is that >there is another line for the "critical application user" if they do not >want to use the "more cutting edge" line. > >We have two lines and should be proud of that concept. If not, then we >should drop the two line development cycle. > >I run 3.5.6 and will be moving to 3.5.7, BUT I am waiting till 3.6.4 or >3.6.5 before I make the move over to the 3.6.x line for my default >desktop. I may try it on one of my laptops, but not the desktop[s]. > >Was that not the reason for the two lines? You run the previous line >till the newest one gets to the point where it is ready for "all users" >and their "critical applications"? That is one reason why I still run >the previous line till the newest one gets to the ".4" or ".5" version. >That is the way the development cycle was set up. > > >On 10/04/2012 08:54 AM, Charles-H. Schulz wrote: >> Public announcements are obviously marketing. Someone repeatedly >> complaining that software comes with bugs on the marketing list is not >> related to marketing. >> >> Charles. >> Le 4 oct. 2012 14:48, "Tom Davies" a écrit : >> >>> Hi :) >>> Ahh, sorry. I didn't realise that public announcements and press releases >>> have nothing to do with marketing. >>> Apols and regards from >>> Tom :) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> From: Charles-H. Schulz >>>> To: "marketing@global.libreoffice.org" >>>> Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2012, 13:30 >>>> Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: >>> [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2 >>>> Tom, >>>> >>>> The points you are making are repeated at each release. I cannot really >>>> help if you refuse to understand how we work or how software development >>>> works. But as we are on the marketing list we need to work on marketing >>> and >>>> not lose our time with recurring rants that are not related to marketing. >>>> >>>> We must discipline ourselves if we are on this list and post on it: we >>> work >>>> on marketing and stay focused on it. >>>> >>>> Thank you for your understanding. >>>> >>>> Charles. >>>> >>>> Charles. >>>> Le 4 oct. 2012 14:01, "Tom Davies" a écrit : >>>> >>>>> Hi :) >>>>> Again. The only advantage listed for the new release in the newest >>> branch >>>>> of LO is that it's "more stable". What is it more stable than? Is it >>> more >>>>> stable than the 3.5.6? >>>>> >>>>> Putting anything mentioning bug-fixes and possible regressions just >>> makes >>>>> people wond
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
Hi :) How about we extoll the real virtues of what we really offer on the page rather than trying to pretend that the 3.6.x is more stable than the 3.5.6 and that stability is the only reason for choosing the 3.6.x? Oh sorry, that was just the press-release/announcement. The downloads page just makes it clear that LO is created only by volunteers and no proper organisations are involved, which suggests that LO is likely to be crap. "Volunteers only work at something because they are really bad at what they do. So, they can't get proper paid professional work" = attitude in most corporate environments i've ever been in. Regards from Tom :) > > From: Cor Nouws >To: Marketing LibreOffice >Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2012, 15:39 >Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] >The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2 > >Hi all, > >Carlo Strata wrote (04-10-12 16:10) >> But how you layout the download page with: >> [...] > >It's not new that we find ourselves in an interesting, challenging situation >with the character of the work, product and the release schedule etc. >Now and then people come up with suggestions to improve the presentation or >explanation of the download page or whatever. >And then we improve a bit... > >So if you have concrete ideas... welcome! >Pls read the discussions in the past first (prevent double work - see >marketing en website mail list archives) and mail your ideas. Much appreciated. > >Regards, >Cor > > >-- - Cor >- http://nl.libreoffice.org >- www.librelex.org > > >-- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+h...@global.libreoffice.org >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/marketing/ >All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted > > > > -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+h...@global.libreoffice.org 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/marketing/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
Hi all, Carlo Strata wrote (04-10-12 16:10) But how you layout the download page with: [...] It's not new that we find ourselves in an interesting, challenging situation with the character of the work, product and the release schedule etc. Now and then people come up with suggestions to improve the presentation or explanation of the download page or whatever. And then we improve a bit... So if you have concrete ideas... welcome! Pls read the discussions in the past first (prevent double work - see marketing en website mail list archives) and mail your ideas. Much appreciated. Regards, Cor -- - Cor - http://nl.libreoffice.org - www.librelex.org -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+h...@global.libreoffice.org 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/marketing/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
But how you layout the download page with: - one or two (!) downloadable versions; - red and/or green logos/semaphore or similar indicator to customer; is marketing of course!!! And if the this choice make people to refuse LibreOffice because they download the wrong-for-them version, this not only is marketing, but also a bad marketing action! My 2 cents. :-) Carlo -- ing. Carlo Strata - via Botticelli 1/4 30031 Dolo - VE Italia - Italy - tel./fax +39.041.822.0665 cell. +39.347.85.69.824 skype carlo.strata - carlo.str...@tiscali.it PEC: carlo.str...@ingpec.eu Il 04/10/2012 14.54, Charles-H. Schulz ha scritto: Public announcements are obviously marketing. Someone repeatedly complaining that software comes with bugs on the marketing list is not related to marketing. Charles. Le 4 oct. 2012 14:48, "Tom Davies" a écrit : Hi :) Ahh, sorry. I didn't realise that public announcements and press releases have nothing to do with marketing. Apols and regards from Tom :) From: Charles-H. Schulz To: "marketing@global.libreoffice.org" Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2012, 13:30 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2 Tom, The points you are making are repeated at each release. I cannot really help if you refuse to understand how we work or how software development works. But as we are on the marketing list we need to work on marketing and not lose our time with recurring rants that are not related to marketing. We must discipline ourselves if we are on this list and post on it: we work on marketing and stay focused on it. Thank you for your understanding. Charles. Charles. Le 4 oct. 2012 14:01, "Tom Davies" a écrit : Hi :) Again. The only advantage listed for the new release in the newest branch of LO is that it's "more stable". What is it more stable than? Is it more stable than the 3.5.6? Putting anything mentioning bug-fixes and possible regressions just makes people wonder what new bugs and new regressions are likely to appear in this new release. Most profitable software companies avoid mentioning the possibility that their new software might be buggy and have new regressions despite the fact we know that both are likely. I think we should avoid mentioning it too until they become more open and honest about the possibility. Possibly marginally better to say "latest" rather than "last" unless you include a date. "Last" sounds fairly finally and hints that it happened a long time ago. I don't know why. Both really mean roughly the same thing if you look them up in a dictionary. Again there are tons of advantages to the newest branch but stability is not one of them. If people want stability then they are better off chosing the latest release in the older branch. If they want, for example, better compatibility with "other" formats and programs (ie such as MS's) then 3.6.x is probably best. Please. Can we have those circular or just plain wrong arguments again about 1. "I haven't noticed any bugs so far and few people have reported bugs". Therefore no bugs really exist because things don't exist until after they have been discovered. For example, the water on Mars didn't exist until there were photos of it. 2. "Any bugs found need to be reported against the earliest version of LO/OOo they can be found in." 3. Rinse and repeat. 1. "It must be more stable. It's newer." Therefore it must be more stable. 2. "We must expect new branches to have more bugs as a result of having much greater functionality" 3. "Older branches focus on bug-fixes and therefore tend to have less new added functionality" 4. Therefore "the only thing we can say about new branches is that they are more stable." 1. "All software has bugs." [Perhaps implying that LO is no more stable than java] Regards from Tom :) - Forwarded Message - From: Italo Vignoli To: annou...@documentfoundation.org Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2012, 12:05 Subject: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2 Berlin, October 4, 2012 - The Document Foundation (TDF) announces LibreOffice 3.6.2, for Windows, MacOS and Linux, solving bugs and regressions and further improving the stability of the program for corporate deployments. The best free office suite ever is quickly becoming the de facto standard for migrations to free office suites, thanks to the quickly growing feature set and the improved interoperability with proprietary software. The growing number of LibreOffice adoptions by private and public enterprises is a demonstration of the improvements brought to the legacy code by TDF, thanks to over 500 developers who are focusing on sta
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
The key would be to ask yourself which version would you give your local government office, or largest business in your community, to use. Would you give them 3.5.6 or the brand new 3.6.2 version? Even our own Release Plan page tells us that ".2 or .3 Early adopters" on the graph. Sure, there are many improvements in the latest 3.6.x line, but would you stake the "company's" rep. on it? Which current version has the least issues to deal with? Which version has had the most work done to fix the bugs and other issues? Which version is for "critical applications"? Those are the things that must be answered. Next week 3.5.7 comes out, which is the last of that line. 3.6.3 comes out the first week of November and 3.6.4 come out the first week of December. I think the real problem is how we may assume that people will always want to try 3.6.x line while it still is in an "early adopter" stage. The download page seems to assume that. Many of us would lake to see that change. As for Press Releases announcing the newest version of the 3.6.x line, it is a good thing. The only thing we should state somewhere is that there is another line for the "critical application user" if they do not want to use the "more cutting edge" line. We have two lines and should be proud of that concept. If not, then we should drop the two line development cycle. I run 3.5.6 and will be moving to 3.5.7, BUT I am waiting till 3.6.4 or 3.6.5 before I make the move over to the 3.6.x line for my default desktop. I may try it on one of my laptops, but not the desktop[s]. Was that not the reason for the two lines? You run the previous line till the newest one gets to the point where it is ready for "all users" and their "critical applications"? That is one reason why I still run the previous line till the newest one gets to the ".4" or ".5" version. That is the way the development cycle was set up. On 10/04/2012 08:54 AM, Charles-H. Schulz wrote: Public announcements are obviously marketing. Someone repeatedly complaining that software comes with bugs on the marketing list is not related to marketing. Charles. Le 4 oct. 2012 14:48, "Tom Davies" a écrit : Hi :) Ahh, sorry. I didn't realise that public announcements and press releases have nothing to do with marketing. Apols and regards from Tom :) ____ From: Charles-H. Schulz To: "marketing@global.libreoffice.org" Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2012, 13:30 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2 Tom, The points you are making are repeated at each release. I cannot really help if you refuse to understand how we work or how software development works. But as we are on the marketing list we need to work on marketing and not lose our time with recurring rants that are not related to marketing. We must discipline ourselves if we are on this list and post on it: we work on marketing and stay focused on it. Thank you for your understanding. Charles. Charles. Le 4 oct. 2012 14:01, "Tom Davies" a écrit : Hi :) Again. The only advantage listed for the new release in the newest branch of LO is that it's "more stable". What is it more stable than? Is it more stable than the 3.5.6? Putting anything mentioning bug-fixes and possible regressions just makes people wonder what new bugs and new regressions are likely to appear in this new release. Most profitable software companies avoid mentioning the possibility that their new software might be buggy and have new regressions despite the fact we know that both are likely. I think we should avoid mentioning it too until they become more open and honest about the possibility. Possibly marginally better to say "latest" rather than "last" unless you include a date. "Last" sounds fairly finally and hints that it happened a long time ago. I don't know why. Both really mean roughly the same thing if you look them up in a dictionary. Again there are tons of advantages to the newest branch but stability is not one of them. If people want stability then they are better off chosing the latest release in the older branch. If they want, for example, better compatibility with "other" formats and programs (ie such as MS's) then 3.6.x is probably best. Please. Can we have those circular or just plain wrong arguments again about 1. "I haven't noticed any bugs so far and few people have reported bugs". Therefore no bugs really exist because things don't exist until after they have been discovered. For example, the water on Mars didn't exist until there were photos of it. 2. "Any bugs found need to be reported agains
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
I read your message three times actually. And I do maintain what I wrote. Thanks, Charles. Le jeudi 04 octobre 2012 à 14:20 +0100, Tom Davies a écrit : > Hi :) > Hmm, try reading my post rather than ignoring it and pretending it > says soemthing other than what it really says. > Regards from > Tom :) > > > > > __ > From: Charles-H. Schulz > > To: Tom Davies > Cc: "marketing@global.libreoffice.org" > > Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2012, 13:54 > Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: > [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice > 3.6.2 > > > Public announcements are obviously marketing. Someone > repeatedly > complaining that software comes with bugs on the marketing > list is not > related to marketing. > > Charles. > Le 4 oct. 2012 14:48, "Tom Davies" a > écrit : > > > Hi :) > > Ahh, sorry. I didn't realise that public announcements and > press releases > > have nothing to do with marketing. > > Apols and regards from > > Tom :) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Charles-H. Schulz > > > >To: "marketing@global.libreoffice.org" > > > >Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2012, 13:30 > > >Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? > Fw: > > [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice > 3.6.2 > > > > > >Tom, > > > > > >The points you are making are repeated at each release. I > cannot really > > >help if you refuse to understand how we work or how > software development > > >works. But as we are on the marketing list we need to work > on marketing > > and > > >not lose our time with recurring rants that are not related > to marketing. > > > > > >We must discipline ourselves if we are on this list and > post on it: we > > work > > >on marketing and stay focused on it. > > > > > >Thank you for your understanding. > > > > > >Charles. > > > > > >Charles. > > >Le 4 oct. 2012 14:01, "Tom Davies" > a écrit : > > > > > >> Hi :) > > >> Again. The only advantage listed for the new release in > the newest > > branch > > >> of LO is that it's "more stable". What is it more stable > than? Is it > > more > > >> stable than the 3.5.6? > > >> > > >> Putting anything mentioning bug-fixes and possible > regressions just > > makes > > >> people wonder what new bugs and new regressions are > likely to appear in > > >> this new release. Most profitable software companies > avoid mentioning > > the > > >> possibility that their new software might be buggy and > have new > > regressions > > >> despite the fact we know that both are likely. I think > we should avoid > > >> mentioning it too until they become more open and honest > about the > > >> possibility. > > >> > > >> > > >> Possibly marginally better to say "latest" rather than > "last" unless you > > >> include a date. "Last" sounds fairly finally and hints > that it > > happened a > > >> long time ago. I don't know why. Both really mean > roughly the same > > thing > > >> if you look them up in a dictionary. > > >> > > >> > > >> Again there are tons of advantages to the newest branch > but stability is > > >> not one of them. If people want stability then they are > better off >
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
Hi :) Hmm, try reading my post rather than ignoring it and pretending it says soemthing other than what it really says. Regards from Tom :) > > From: Charles-H. Schulz >To: Tom Davies >Cc: "marketing@global.libreoffice.org" >Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2012, 13:54 >Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] >The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2 > >Public announcements are obviously marketing. Someone repeatedly >complaining that software comes with bugs on the marketing list is not >related to marketing. > >Charles. >Le 4 oct. 2012 14:48, "Tom Davies" a écrit : > >> Hi :) >> Ahh, sorry. I didn't realise that public announcements and press releases >> have nothing to do with marketing. >> Apols and regards from >> Tom :) >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> > From: Charles-H. Schulz >> >To: "marketing@global.libreoffice.org" >> >Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2012, 13:30 >> >Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: >> [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2 >> > >> >Tom, >> > >> >The points you are making are repeated at each release. I cannot really >> >help if you refuse to understand how we work or how software development >> >works. But as we are on the marketing list we need to work on marketing >> and >> >not lose our time with recurring rants that are not related to marketing. >> > >> >We must discipline ourselves if we are on this list and post on it: we >> work >> >on marketing and stay focused on it. >> > >> >Thank you for your understanding. >> > >> >Charles. >> > >> >Charles. >> >Le 4 oct. 2012 14:01, "Tom Davies" a écrit : >> > >> >> Hi :) >> >> Again. The only advantage listed for the new release in the newest >> branch >> >> of LO is that it's "more stable". What is it more stable than? Is it >> more >> >> stable than the 3.5.6? >> >> >> >> Putting anything mentioning bug-fixes and possible regressions just >> makes >> >> people wonder what new bugs and new regressions are likely to appear in >> >> this new release. Most profitable software companies avoid mentioning >> the >> >> possibility that their new software might be buggy and have new >> regressions >> >> despite the fact we know that both are likely. I think we should avoid >> >> mentioning it too until they become more open and honest about the >> >> possibility. >> >> >> >> >> >> Possibly marginally better to say "latest" rather than "last" unless you >> >> include a date. "Last" sounds fairly finally and hints that it >> happened a >> >> long time ago. I don't know why. Both really mean roughly the same >> thing >> >> if you look them up in a dictionary. >> >> >> >> >> >> Again there are tons of advantages to the newest branch but stability is >> >> not one of them. If people want stability then they are better off >> chosing >> >> the latest release in the older branch. If they want, for example, >> better >> >> compatibility with "other" formats and programs (ie such as MS's) then >> >> 3.6.x is probably best. >> >> >> >> >> >> Please. Can we have those circular or just plain wrong arguments again >> >> about >> >> 1. "I haven't noticed any bugs so far and few people have reported >> >> bugs". Therefore no bugs really exist because things don't exist until >> >> after they have been discovered. For example, the water on Mars didn't >> >> exist until there were photos of it. >> >> >> >> 2. "Any bugs found need to be reported against the earliest version of >> >> LO/OOo they can be found in." >> >> >> >> 3. Rinse and repeat. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 1. "It must be more stable. It's newer." Therefore it must be more >> >> stable. >> >> >> >> 2. "We must expect new branches to have more bugs as a result of >> having >> >> much greater functionality" >> >
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
Public announcements are obviously marketing. Someone repeatedly complaining that software comes with bugs on the marketing list is not related to marketing. Charles. Le 4 oct. 2012 14:48, "Tom Davies" a écrit : > Hi :) > Ahh, sorry. I didn't realise that public announcements and press releases > have nothing to do with marketing. > Apols and regards from > Tom :) > > > > > > > > > From: Charles-H. Schulz > >To: "marketing@global.libreoffice.org" > >Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2012, 13:30 > >Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: > [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2 > > > >Tom, > > > >The points you are making are repeated at each release. I cannot really > >help if you refuse to understand how we work or how software development > >works. But as we are on the marketing list we need to work on marketing > and > >not lose our time with recurring rants that are not related to marketing. > > > >We must discipline ourselves if we are on this list and post on it: we > work > >on marketing and stay focused on it. > > > >Thank you for your understanding. > > > >Charles. > > > >Charles. > >Le 4 oct. 2012 14:01, "Tom Davies" a écrit : > > > >> Hi :) > >> Again. The only advantage listed for the new release in the newest > branch > >> of LO is that it's "more stable". What is it more stable than? Is it > more > >> stable than the 3.5.6? > >> > >> Putting anything mentioning bug-fixes and possible regressions just > makes > >> people wonder what new bugs and new regressions are likely to appear in > >> this new release. Most profitable software companies avoid mentioning > the > >> possibility that their new software might be buggy and have new > regressions > >> despite the fact we know that both are likely. I think we should avoid > >> mentioning it too until they become more open and honest about the > >> possibility. > >> > >> > >> Possibly marginally better to say "latest" rather than "last" unless you > >> include a date. "Last" sounds fairly finally and hints that it > happened a > >> long time ago. I don't know why. Both really mean roughly the same > thing > >> if you look them up in a dictionary. > >> > >> > >> Again there are tons of advantages to the newest branch but stability is > >> not one of them. If people want stability then they are better off > chosing > >> the latest release in the older branch. If they want, for example, > better > >> compatibility with "other" formats and programs (ie such as MS's) then > >> 3.6.x is probably best. > >> > >> > >> Please. Can we have those circular or just plain wrong arguments again > >> about > >> 1. "I haven't noticed any bugs so far and few people have reported > >> bugs". Therefore no bugs really exist because things don't exist until > >> after they have been discovered. For example, the water on Mars didn't > >> exist until there were photos of it. > >> > >> 2. "Any bugs found need to be reported against the earliest version of > >> LO/OOo they can be found in." > >> > >> 3. Rinse and repeat. > >> > >> > >> > >> 1. "It must be more stable. It's newer." Therefore it must be more > >> stable. > >> > >> 2. "We must expect new branches to have more bugs as a result of > having > >> much greater functionality" > >> 3. "Older branches focus on bug-fixes and therefore tend to have less > new > >> added functionality" > >> > >> 4. Therefore "the only thing we can say about new branches is that they > >> are more stable." > >> > >> > >> 1. "All software has bugs." [Perhaps implying that LO is no more > stable > >> than java] > >> > >> Regards from > >> Tom :) > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> - Forwarded Message - > >> >From: Italo Vignoli > >> >To: annou...@documentfoundation.org > >> >Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2012, 12:05 > >> >Subject: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice > >> 3.6.2 > >> &g
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
Hi :) Ahh, sorry. I didn't realise that public announcements and press releases have nothing to do with marketing. Apols and regards from Tom :) > > From: Charles-H. Schulz >To: "marketing@global.libreoffice.org" >Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2012, 13:30 >Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] >The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2 > >Tom, > >The points you are making are repeated at each release. I cannot really >help if you refuse to understand how we work or how software development >works. But as we are on the marketing list we need to work on marketing and >not lose our time with recurring rants that are not related to marketing. > >We must discipline ourselves if we are on this list and post on it: we work >on marketing and stay focused on it. > >Thank you for your understanding. > >Charles. > >Charles. >Le 4 oct. 2012 14:01, "Tom Davies" a écrit : > >> Hi :) >> Again. The only advantage listed for the new release in the newest branch >> of LO is that it's "more stable". What is it more stable than? Is it more >> stable than the 3.5.6? >> >> Putting anything mentioning bug-fixes and possible regressions just makes >> people wonder what new bugs and new regressions are likely to appear in >> this new release. Most profitable software companies avoid mentioning the >> possibility that their new software might be buggy and have new regressions >> despite the fact we know that both are likely. I think we should avoid >> mentioning it too until they become more open and honest about the >> possibility. >> >> >> Possibly marginally better to say "latest" rather than "last" unless you >> include a date. "Last" sounds fairly finally and hints that it happened a >> long time ago. I don't know why. Both really mean roughly the same thing >> if you look them up in a dictionary. >> >> >> Again there are tons of advantages to the newest branch but stability is >> not one of them. If people want stability then they are better off chosing >> the latest release in the older branch. If they want, for example, better >> compatibility with "other" formats and programs (ie such as MS's) then >> 3.6.x is probably best. >> >> >> Please. Can we have those circular or just plain wrong arguments again >> about >> 1. "I haven't noticed any bugs so far and few people have reported >> bugs". Therefore no bugs really exist because things don't exist until >> after they have been discovered. For example, the water on Mars didn't >> exist until there were photos of it. >> >> 2. "Any bugs found need to be reported against the earliest version of >> LO/OOo they can be found in." >> >> 3. Rinse and repeat. >> >> >> >> 1. "It must be more stable. It's newer." Therefore it must be more >> stable. >> >> 2. "We must expect new branches to have more bugs as a result of having >> much greater functionality" >> 3. "Older branches focus on bug-fixes and therefore tend to have less new >> added functionality" >> >> 4. Therefore "the only thing we can say about new branches is that they >> are more stable." >> >> >> 1. "All software has bugs." [Perhaps implying that LO is no more stable >> than java] >> >> Regards from >> Tom :) >> >> >> >> >> >> - Forwarded Message - >> >From: Italo Vignoli >> >To: annou...@documentfoundation.org >> >Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2012, 12:05 >> >Subject: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice >> 3.6.2 >> > >> >Berlin, October 4, 2012 - The Document Foundation (TDF) announces >> >LibreOffice 3.6.2, for Windows, MacOS and Linux, solving bugs and >> >regressions and further improving the stability of the program for >> >corporate deployments. The best free office suite ever is quickly >> >becoming the de facto standard for migrations to free office suites, >> >thanks to the quickly growing feature set and the improved >> >interoperability with proprietary software. >> > >> >The growing number of LibreOffice adoptions by private and public >> >enterprises is a demonstration of the improvements brought to the legacy >> >code by TDF, thanks to over 500 developers who are focusing on stability &
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
Tom, The points you are making are repeated at each release. I cannot really help if you refuse to understand how we work or how software development works. But as we are on the marketing list we need to work on marketing and not lose our time with recurring rants that are not related to marketing. We must discipline ourselves if we are on this list and post on it: we work on marketing and stay focused on it. Thank you for your understanding. Charles. Charles. Le 4 oct. 2012 14:01, "Tom Davies" a écrit : > Hi :) > Again. The only advantage listed for the new release in the newest branch > of LO is that it's "more stable". What is it more stable than? Is it more > stable than the 3.5.6? > > Putting anything mentioning bug-fixes and possible regressions just makes > people wonder what new bugs and new regressions are likely to appear in > this new release. Most profitable software companies avoid mentioning the > possibility that their new software might be buggy and have new regressions > despite the fact we know that both are likely. I think we should avoid > mentioning it too until they become more open and honest about the > possibility. > > > Possibly marginally better to say "latest" rather than "last" unless you > include a date. "Last" sounds fairly finally and hints that it happened a > long time ago. I don't know why. Both really mean roughly the same thing > if you look them up in a dictionary. > > > Again there are tons of advantages to the newest branch but stability is > not one of them. If people want stability then they are better off chosing > the latest release in the older branch. If they want, for example, better > compatibility with "other" formats and programs (ie such as MS's) then > 3.6.x is probably best. > > > Please. Can we have those circular or just plain wrong arguments again > about > 1. "I haven't noticed any bugs so far and few people have reported > bugs". Therefore no bugs really exist because things don't exist until > after they have been discovered. For example, the water on Mars didn't > exist until there were photos of it. > > 2. "Any bugs found need to be reported against the earliest version of > LO/OOo they can be found in." > > 3. Rinse and repeat. > > > > 1. "It must be more stable. It's newer." Therefore it must be more > stable. > > 2. "We must expect new branches to have more bugs as a result of having > much greater functionality" > 3. "Older branches focus on bug-fixes and therefore tend to have less new > added functionality" > > 4. Therefore "the only thing we can say about new branches is that they > are more stable." > > > 1. "All software has bugs." [Perhaps implying that LO is no more stable > than java] > > Regards from > Tom :) > > > > > > - Forwarded Message - > >From: Italo Vignoli > >To: annou...@documentfoundation.org > >Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2012, 12:05 > >Subject: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice > 3.6.2 > > > >Berlin, October 4, 2012 - The Document Foundation (TDF) announces > >LibreOffice 3.6.2, for Windows, MacOS and Linux, solving bugs and > >regressions and further improving the stability of the program for > >corporate deployments. The best free office suite ever is quickly > >becoming the de facto standard for migrations to free office suites, > >thanks to the quickly growing feature set and the improved > >interoperability with proprietary software. > > > >The growing number of LibreOffice adoptions by private and public > >enterprises is a demonstration of the improvements brought to the legacy > >code by TDF, thanks to over 500 developers who are focusing on stability > >and quality (in addition to new exciting features). > > > >The last public administration to migrate has been the city of Limerick, > >Ireland's third largest city, where LibreOffice is now used on all 450 > >desktops in use at the city's six main locations including the three > >public libraries, the fire department, the municipal museum and the City > >Gallery of Art. > > > >The community behind LibreOffice will gather in Berlin for the second > >LiboCon from October 17 to October 19. During three days, company > >representatives and volunteers will discuss their experiences, learning > >from each other in the true spirit of the community. > > > >Registration for the conference end on October 8, Registration for the > >conference ends on October the 8th. If you want to join in, please > >register at this address: http://conference.libreoffice.org/registration. > > > >LibreOffice 3.6.2 is available for immediate download from the following > >link: http://www.libreoffice.org/download/. Extensions for LibreOffice > >are available from the following link: > >http://extensions.libreoffice.org/extension-center. > > > >Change logs are available at > > > http://download.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/src/bugfixes-libreoffice-3-6-1-release-3.6.2.1.log > >(fixed in 3.6.2.1) and > > > http://download.
Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
Hi Tom, You certainly have a point here ;) +1 On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 2:00 PM, Tom Davies wrote: > Hi :) > Again. The only advantage listed for the new release in the newest branch > of LO is that it's "more stable". What is it more stable than? Is it more > stable than the 3.5.6? > > Putting anything mentioning bug-fixes and possible regressions just makes > people wonder what new bugs and new regressions are likely to appear in > this new release. Most profitable software companies avoid mentioning the > possibility that their new software might be buggy and have new regressions > despite the fact we know that both are likely. I think we should avoid > mentioning it too until they become more open and honest about the > possibility. > > > Possibly marginally better to say "latest" rather than "last" unless you > include a date. "Last" sounds fairly finally and hints that it happened a > long time ago. I don't know why. Both really mean roughly the same thing > if you look them up in a dictionary. > > > Again there are tons of advantages to the newest branch but stability is > not one of them. If people want stability then they are better off chosing > the latest release in the older branch. If they want, for example, better > compatibility with "other" formats and programs (ie such as MS's) then > 3.6.x is probably best. > > > Please. Can we have those circular or just plain wrong arguments again > about > 1. "I haven't noticed any bugs so far and few people have reported > bugs". Therefore no bugs really exist because things don't exist until > after they have been discovered. For example, the water on Mars didn't > exist until there were photos of it. > > 2. "Any bugs found need to be reported against the earliest version of > LO/OOo they can be found in." > > 3. Rinse and repeat. > > > > 1. "It must be more stable. It's newer." Therefore it must be more > stable. > > 2. "We must expect new branches to have more bugs as a result of having > much greater functionality" > 3. "Older branches focus on bug-fixes and therefore tend to have less new > added functionality" > > 4. Therefore "the only thing we can say about new branches is that they > are more stable." > > > 1. "All software has bugs." [Perhaps implying that LO is no more stable > than java] > > Regards from > Tom :) > > > > > > - Forwarded Message - > >From: Italo Vignoli > >To: annou...@documentfoundation.org > >Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2012, 12:05 > >Subject: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice > 3.6.2 > > > >Berlin, October 4, 2012 - The Document Foundation (TDF) announces > >LibreOffice 3.6.2, for Windows, MacOS and Linux, solving bugs and > >regressions and further improving the stability of the program for > >corporate deployments. The best free office suite ever is quickly > >becoming the de facto standard for migrations to free office suites, > >thanks to the quickly growing feature set and the improved > >interoperability with proprietary software. > > > >The growing number of LibreOffice adoptions by private and public > >enterprises is a demonstration of the improvements brought to the legacy > >code by TDF, thanks to over 500 developers who are focusing on stability > >and quality (in addition to new exciting features). > > > >The last public administration to migrate has been the city of Limerick, > >Ireland's third largest city, where LibreOffice is now used on all 450 > >desktops in use at the city's six main locations including the three > >public libraries, the fire department, the municipal museum and the City > >Gallery of Art. > > > >The community behind LibreOffice will gather in Berlin for the second > >LiboCon from October 17 to October 19. During three days, company > >representatives and volunteers will discuss their experiences, learning > >from each other in the true spirit of the community. > > > >Registration for the conference end on October 8, Registration for the > >conference ends on October the 8th. If you want to join in, please > >register at this address: http://conference.libreoffice.org/registration. > > > >LibreOffice 3.6.2 is available for immediate download from the following > >link: http://www.libreoffice.org/download/. Extensions for LibreOffice > >are available from the following link: > >http://extensions.libreoffice.org/extension-center. > > > >Change logs are available at > > > http://download.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/src/bugfixes-libreoffice-3-6-1-release-3.6.2.1.log > >(fixed in 3.6.2.1) and > > > http://download.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/src/bugfixes-libreoffice-3-6-1-release-3.6.2.2.log > >(fixed in 3.6.2.2). > > > >Short link to The Document Foundation blog: http://wp.me/p1byPE-jV. > > > >-- > >Italo Vignoli - Director > >phone +39.348.5653829 - skype italovignoli > >email italo.vign...@documentfoundation.org > >The Document Foundation > >Zimmerstraße 69, 10117 Berlin, Germany > >Rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürg
[libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
Hi :) Again. The only advantage listed for the new release in the newest branch of LO is that it's "more stable". What is it more stable than? Is it more stable than the 3.5.6? Putting anything mentioning bug-fixes and possible regressions just makes people wonder what new bugs and new regressions are likely to appear in this new release. Most profitable software companies avoid mentioning the possibility that their new software might be buggy and have new regressions despite the fact we know that both are likely. I think we should avoid mentioning it too until they become more open and honest about the possibility. Possibly marginally better to say "latest" rather than "last" unless you include a date. "Last" sounds fairly finally and hints that it happened a long time ago. I don't know why. Both really mean roughly the same thing if you look them up in a dictionary. Again there are tons of advantages to the newest branch but stability is not one of them. If people want stability then they are better off chosing the latest release in the older branch. If they want, for example, better compatibility with "other" formats and programs (ie such as MS's) then 3.6.x is probably best. Please. Can we have those circular or just plain wrong arguments again about 1. "I haven't noticed any bugs so far and few people have reported bugs". Therefore no bugs really exist because things don't exist until after they have been discovered. For example, the water on Mars didn't exist until there were photos of it. 2. "Any bugs found need to be reported against the earliest version of LO/OOo they can be found in." 3. Rinse and repeat. 1. "It must be more stable. It's newer." Therefore it must be more stable. 2. "We must expect new branches to have more bugs as a result of having much greater functionality" 3. "Older branches focus on bug-fixes and therefore tend to have less new added functionality" 4. Therefore "the only thing we can say about new branches is that they are more stable." 1. "All software has bugs." [Perhaps implying that LO is no more stable than java] Regards from Tom :) - Forwarded Message - >From: Italo Vignoli >To: annou...@documentfoundation.org >Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2012, 12:05 >Subject: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2 > >Berlin, October 4, 2012 - The Document Foundation (TDF) announces >LibreOffice 3.6.2, for Windows, MacOS and Linux, solving bugs and >regressions and further improving the stability of the program for >corporate deployments. The best free office suite ever is quickly >becoming the de facto standard for migrations to free office suites, >thanks to the quickly growing feature set and the improved >interoperability with proprietary software. > >The growing number of LibreOffice adoptions by private and public >enterprises is a demonstration of the improvements brought to the legacy >code by TDF, thanks to over 500 developers who are focusing on stability >and quality (in addition to new exciting features). > >The last public administration to migrate has been the city of Limerick, >Ireland's third largest city, where LibreOffice is now used on all 450 >desktops in use at the city's six main locations including the three >public libraries, the fire department, the municipal museum and the City >Gallery of Art. > >The community behind LibreOffice will gather in Berlin for the second >LiboCon from October 17 to October 19. During three days, company >representatives and volunteers will discuss their experiences, learning >from each other in the true spirit of the community. > >Registration for the conference end on October 8, Registration for the >conference ends on October the 8th. If you want to join in, please >register at this address: http://conference.libreoffice.org/registration. > >LibreOffice 3.6.2 is available for immediate download from the following >link: http://www.libreoffice.org/download/. Extensions for LibreOffice >are available from the following link: >http://extensions.libreoffice.org/extension-center. > >Change logs are available at >http://download.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/src/bugfixes-libreoffice-3-6-1-release-3.6.2.1.log >(fixed in 3.6.2.1) and >http://download.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/src/bugfixes-libreoffice-3-6-1-release-3.6.2.2.log >(fixed in 3.6.2.2). > >Short link to The Document Foundation blog: http://wp.me/p1byPE-jV. > >-- >Italo Vignoli - Director >phone +39.348.5653829 - skype italovignoli >email italo.vign...@documentfoundation.org >The Document Foundation >Zimmerstraße 69, 10117 Berlin, Germany >Rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts >Legal Details: www.documentfoundation.org/imprint > >-- >Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to announce+h...@documentfoundation.org >Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ >List archive: http://listarchives.documentfo
