Re: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and the DVD[s] I have been working with

2011-10-11 Thread Tanstaafl

On 2011-10-09 5:21 PM, planas jsloz...@gmail.com wrote:

Obviously, bug fixes are included in the LTS but what about
backporting new features into the LTS for example. This is very
important for organizations planning their software support and
upgrade cycle.


The whole *point* of LTS is 'bugfixes only'. If you want new features, 
upgrade to the latest version that has the features you want/need.


--
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+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/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


Re: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and the DVD[s] I have been working with

2011-10-11 Thread Tom Davies
Hi :)
I agree that's the way Ubuntu do it but as Jay was pointing out we don't always 
need to follow their way.  Ubuntu and Firefox have had huge successes in 
getting into mainstream markets so it might be worth noticing what they do but 
we might be able to improve on their ideas.  Personnally i agree that 
back-porting bug-fixes is as far as we need to take it but that's really 
something for the devs to decide.  

I think that this list's function in terms of support is just being able to 
directly help or sign-post people to help for supported releases (such as 
LTSes).  
Regards from
Tom :)


--- On Tue, 11/10/11, Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org wrote:

From: Tanstaafl tansta...@libertytrek.org
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and 
the DVD[s] I have been working with
To: users@global.libreoffice.org
Date: Tuesday, 11 October, 2011, 11:51

On 2011-10-09 5:21 PM, planas jsloz...@gmail.com wrote:
 Obviously, bug fixes are included in the LTS but what about
 backporting new features into the LTS for example. This is very
 important for organizations planning their software support and
 upgrade cycle.

The whole *point* of LTS is 'bugfixes only'. If you want new features, upgrade 
to the latest version that has the features you want/need.

-- For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+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/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

-- 
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+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/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted



Re: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and the DVD[s] I have been working with

2011-10-09 Thread e-letter
On 07/10/2011, webmaster for Kracked Press Productions
webmas...@krackedpress.com wrote:

 I have had the idea for a few months now, so I figured it was time to
 start working on it.


Why?

 most stable will be describing 3.4.x versions.  So maybe not using
 that phrase would be better for marketing.

 http://libreoffice-na.us/multi-version/install.html


Having reviewed the above web site:

The third line of the title refers to an American project. The project
should be explained in terms of history, purpose and objectives.

Subsequent paragraphs are vague.

Let us pose the question; why are two software versions promoted? This
is wrong. To avoid confusion, only 33 versions should be visible. In a
second page, e.g. explaining support, reference should be made to the
concept of users helping others via mailing lists and that for future
development, quality software testers required for future versions. It
is at this point that the use of version 34 is announced for this
purpose. For testers, suggested test environments should be explained;
e.g. a dual boot of the same gnu/linux operating system, one with
LO33, the other system with beta test versions such as the current
LO34.

The web page states m$ on numerous occasions. Not a single reference
to ODF! This is fundamentally wrong. What is the purpose of LO, to be
a m$ clone, or provide an alternative method of creating documents? Do
you want programmers to be wasting their time endlessly reverse
engineering m$ formats for compatibility, or spending that precious
time developing the performance of odf formats. Remember, the
objective is an increase, a proliferation, of odf documents. The
objective is not an increase in m$ formats created/edited/distributed
using LO.

The web page does not promote a single feature _and_ benefit of using
LO. Being able to perpetuate m$ formats is of no benefit to LO or ODF.
An example that could have been promoted: LO makes extensive use of
'styles', to enable documents to be created simply and quickly, whilst
format of text is controlled in a consistent manner..

If LO33 is stable, why try and state that LO34 is also stable??? There
is an implication that LO33 is claimed to be the final product, but
really the programmers don't want a stable product to be used, they
want people to use a buggy LO34 version and report bugs instead of
actually using LO to create odf documents.

Paragraph 5 is even more worrying. It forgets that ideally, users
would be able to create documents with a stable product that does not
need upgrading every week.

-- 
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+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/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


Re: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and the DVD[s] I have been working with

2011-10-09 Thread e-letter
On 07/10/2011, Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:

 As far as i can tell the 3.4.x branch has never been claimed to have
 long-term support.  Patches, updates and such are never likely to be
 back-ported to that branch.  Although that is not really an issue as LO
 doesn't seem to do updates anyway.  It's the long-term support that makes
 something stable and thus useful to corporate clients.


Rubbish. What is useful to businesses is a product that performs
consistently, reliably and to high quality. Per se, no business is
going to buy a product because of long-term support (whatever that
is) if the product is poor quality in the first instance. This is a
ludicrous claim: a broken photocopier is bought but because the
supplier offers support, the photocopier is miraculously fixed!

 At the outset the 3.3.x branch was claimed to have long term support of up
 to 1 year from release date.  Quite what that support means in a project
 that develops so much so fast that it has no time for minor updates is
 unclear.  The 3.4.3 is claimed to be stable but again it's unclear what
 that means.  Perhaps LO will decide whether to use the Debian or the Ubuntu
 plan or make a new one.  At the moment it's just unclear or at least not
 obvious.


Please refer to the url where it is stated that long-term support is
provided, especially by whom.

 On the plus side it is relatively trivial to test new releases and then
 roll-out upgrades without messing-up peoples settings or even to revert back
 to previous releases if a serious problem happens.  People seldom need to be
 on the same release at the same time in order to share stuff but to create
 some things initially you might need the latest.


Nonsense. Provide evidence of a single entity where users are
encouraged to test new releases (instead of performing productive
output contributing to the entity's profits) and time involved is
accounted for as trivial.

If a document to be created requires a feature available only in the
latest version, everyone then requires the latest version in order to
see the document as intended. Another typical contradictory sentence.


 The Ubuntu model differs from the Debian one by having strictly scheduled
 releases every 6 months.  These are it's equivalent of Development

There is more to gnu/linux than ubuntu.

 So, Ubuntu has a system that is clear and obvious to non-geeky corporate
 clients.  It gives them confidence in planning for the future, such as when
 to schedule a roll-out of upgrades across a large number of machines.  They
 also gain confidence knowing that if threats develop or accidents happen
 then updates will happen 'automatically' and they can rely on getting tech
 support if needed.


Rubbish. Businesses have chosen redhat (as an historic example of life
before ubuntu) because of stability and security whereby software
versions have operated in _years_ before changes are required.
Businesses also averse to automatic updates; because risk assessments
are often required to evaluate the impact of software changes,
especially where customisations have been done for specific reasons.

 Of course the flip-side, as most non-business types appreciate, is that the
 product might be better sometimes with a little more work which might take 5
 mins or might take 5 months.  Most OpenSource projects (before Ubuntu) were
 quite happy delaying releases until they were ready with the better
 product.  It's more rigorous and the product has better integrity but it is
 exactly the opposite of corporate culture and totally beyond their
 understanding.  They see it as lazy and unpredictable even tho that misses
 the point completely.  Ubuntu's answer was to 'freeze' development of each
 project at a point the product is good enough and then the next release
 hopefully contains the better product.


More rubbish. What business does not understand the software quality
assurance process, used in proprietary software by internal staff? Get
off ubuntu's ... and realise the gnu/linux world is far, far greater.

 The 3.4.3 is the best release to use.  I'm not sure it's appropriate to
 describe one branch as better than another for any particular reason now
 that the 3.4.3 is claimed to be stable (whatever they mean by that).
 Existing users of 3.3.0 and 3.3.1 will need to start thinking about details
 of upgrading soon as their year is almost up already.  3.3.2 and 3.3.3 need
 to start planning if they haven't already.  My plan is to sitwait for the
 Ppa to give me a new one but i have already downloaded the 3.4.3 for both
 Windows and Debian-family (Ubuntu) and saved it to the network so i can
 upgrade if i happen to have time and access to a particular machine.  Not
 exactly a good corporate strategy and not a great plan for places that have
 a lot of machines!


LO34 is not the best to use; published bugs tell the story. Users can
use LO33 for as long as they wish, of their own volition. A user can
use LO33 in perpetuity 

Re: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and the DVD[s] I have been working with

2011-10-09 Thread Cor Nouws

Hi Tom,

Tom Davies wrote (08-10-11 12:10)


At this point we could probably start thinking about longer-term
support than just 1 year.  A lot has changed this year and the future
seems much more solidly certain for TDF and LO. Regards from Tom :)


No one will hold you from thinking about that. But before building 
expectations, it is good to realise that decisions about release cycles 
are made by the people that do the development work.


Regards,


--
 - Cor
 - http://nl.libreoffice.org


--
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+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/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted



Re: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and the DVD[s] I have been working with

2011-10-09 Thread webmaster for Kracked Press Productions


Each line ends.  If someone is still using 3.3.5 in December 2013 [13 
months after it was released], they should be encouraged to upgrade to a 
newer line.  I do not think there will be an end of support for an old 
product line, but to be honest, how long will we support the older 
lines?  2 years, 3 years?


We do need to set a policy on supporting older versions of LO.  Right 
now, when people are asking questions about issues with older versions, 
they may be asked why they did not try a newer one.  Many times the 
issues that people have with one version of LO is corrected with the 
next one.  So if LO is on line 3.6.x, what do we say to a user that is 
still using 3.3.x?  Do we tell them to try 3.4.x, 3.5.x, or 3.6.x, to 
fix the issue, or do we walk them through the walk-around for that 
issue they are having?


3.3.0 was released over 8 months ago [more if you include alpha and 
beta].  We are not at version 3.3.4, plus a new line with 3.4.3.  We 
need to decide on what we are going to do or say for supporting the 
older versions.  It is time.  Even though support is through these 
lists, free to all who ask for it, most professional software companies 
should have support policies on how long they are going to keep 
supporting the older versions of their software.  LO should also do this.




On 10/09/2011 06:05 AM, Cor Nouws wrote:

Hi Tom,

Tom Davies wrote (08-10-11 12:10)


At this point we could probably start thinking about longer-term
support than just 1 year.  A lot has changed this year and the future
seems much more solidly certain for TDF and LO. Regards from Tom :)


No one will hold you from thinking about that. But before building 
expectations, it is good to realise that decisions about release 
cycles are made by the people that do the development work.


Regards,





--
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+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/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted



Re: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and the DVD[s] I have been working with

2011-10-09 Thread planas
Cor

On Sun, 2011-10-09 at 12:05 +0200, Cor Nouws wrote: 

 Hi Tom,
 
 Tom Davies wrote (08-10-11 12:10)
 
  At this point we could probably start thinking about longer-term
  support than just 1 year.  A lot has changed this year and the future
  seems much more solidly certain for TDF and LO. Regards from Tom :)
 
 No one will hold you from thinking about that. But before building 
 expectations, it is good to realise that decisions about release cycles 
 are made by the people that do the development work.
 
 Regards,
 
 
 -- 
   - Cor
   - http://nl.libreoffice.org

I think we are growing to point were the issue of long term support
probably needs to be addressed. I think this more an issue with
corporate users rather than home/home office users. Large organizations
dislike having to update very frequently and we need to find the best
balance for them and us. Linux users are probably affected less because
of the distros will provide one of the more recent versions. But Windows
and Mac users need to update manually or in a corporate environment the
IT department will need to roll out the new version/update. Firefox has
received criticism for their rapid versioning from 4 to 7 in the last
several months from corporate users.

There are several possibilities. We could say every odd or even (3.3 vs
3.4) is the LTS with support for 2 or 3 years and the other is supported
for 1 year for example. We could say every, say third release (3.3 the
3.6) is the LTS with support for the other version. One of the years
releases (3.3, 3.4, and 3.5?) could be designated the LTS. Please note
these are just ideas put out to stimulate thinking and discussion for us
to determine what is best overall for LO and our users.

Obviously, this is not an issue that can be decided without discussing
with others such as the devs before a decision is reached but one that
probably needs to addressing in the near future. The goal is to have a
policy that can be used for planning by us and by users and is
reasonable for both.


-- 
Jay Lozier
jsloz...@gmail.com

-- 
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+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/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


Re: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and the DVD[s] I have been working with

2011-10-09 Thread Cor Nouws

planas wrote (09-10-11 18:05)


I think we are growing to point were the issue of long term support
probably needs to be addressed. I think this more an issue with
corporate users rather than home/home office users. Large organizations
dislike having to update very frequently


Tell me. I run a company providing professional support ;-)


and we need to find the best
balance for them and us. Linux users are probably affected less because


Cheers,

--
 - Cor
 - http://nl.libreoffice.org


--
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+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/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


Re: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and the DVD[s] I have been working with

2011-10-09 Thread jorge
Hi

I'll try to contribute with something.

I think that a LTS version of whatever product has to do the job well
(Their main performance for which it was made). In this case, LO
Software, I think that if It makes well all thinks that the Menu expose,
it is a LTS version because it is able to solve users usual needs. What
about bugs. I think that the bugs usually are special features that we
expect of LO, ... In others words, if there is a bug or bugs that
affects the calcs (actions), that we usually hope to do with the Menu,
that bug afffects seriously the version and it can't be LTS.

And I think too that is necesary to support what ever official LTS
version until comes another new LTS version.

I analized this thinking in a company, profesional or student. What
they need ? At least that the software does what it says that it can do
(On the Menu- Its performance).

Regards,

Jorge Rodríguez
___


El dom, 09-10-2011 a las 12:05 -0400, planas escribió:
 Cor
 
 On Sun, 2011-10-09 at 12:05 +0200, Cor Nouws wrote: 
 
  Hi Tom,
  
  Tom Davies wrote (08-10-11 12:10)
  
   At this point we could probably start thinking about longer-term
   support than just 1 year.  A lot has changed this year and the future
   seems much more solidly certain for TDF and LO. Regards from Tom :)
  
  No one will hold you from thinking about that. But before building 
  expectations, it is good to realise that decisions about release cycles 
  are made by the people that do the development work.
  
  Regards,
  
  
  -- 
- Cor
- http://nl.libreoffice.org
 
 I think we are growing to point were the issue of long term support
 probably needs to be addressed. I think this more an issue with
 corporate users rather than home/home office users. Large organizations
 dislike having to update very frequently and we need to find the best
 balance for them and us. Linux users are probably affected less because
 of the distros will provide one of the more recent versions. But Windows
 and Mac users need to update manually or in a corporate environment the
 IT department will need to roll out the new version/update. Firefox has
 received criticism for their rapid versioning from 4 to 7 in the last
 several months from corporate users.
 
 There are several possibilities. We could say every odd or even (3.3 vs
 3.4) is the LTS with support for 2 or 3 years and the other is supported
 for 1 year for example. We could say every, say third release (3.3 the
 3.6) is the LTS with support for the other version. One of the years
 releases (3.3, 3.4, and 3.5?) could be designated the LTS. Please note
 these are just ideas put out to stimulate thinking and discussion for us
 to determine what is best overall for LO and our users.
 
 Obviously, this is not an issue that can be decided without discussing
 with others such as the devs before a decision is reached but one that
 probably needs to addressing in the near future. The goal is to have a
 policy that can be used for planning by us and by users and is
 reasonable for both.
 
 
 -- 
 Jay Lozier
 jsloz...@gmail.com
 

-- 
Atentamente,

Jorge Rodríguez


-- 
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+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/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


Re: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and the DVD[s] I have been working with

2011-10-09 Thread planas
Jorge,

On Sun, 2011-10-09 at 14:53 -0600, jorge wrote: 

 Hi
 
   I'll try to contribute with something.
 
   I think that a LTS version of whatever product has to do the job well
 (Their main performance for which it was made). In this case, LO
 Software, I think that if It makes well all thinks that the Menu expose,
 it is a LTS version because it is able to solve users usual needs. What
 about bugs. I think that the bugs usually are special features that we
 expect of LO, ... In others words, if there is a bug or bugs that
 affects the calcs (actions), that we usually hope to do with the Menu,
 that bug afffects seriously the version and it can't be LTS.
 
   And I think too that is necesary to support what ever official LTS
 version until comes another new LTS version.
 
   I analized this thinking in a company, profesional or student. What
 they need ? At least that the software does what it says that it can do
 (On the Menu- Its performance).
 

There two major issues about defining an LTS version. One is what
constitutes LTS, what do we explicitly promise users to do and how long
a term is the LTS. Obviously, bug fixes are included in the LTS but what
about backporting new features into the LTS for example. This is very
important for organizations planning their software support and upgrade
cycle. While LO is free for any user in larger organizations there are
deployment costs that are not trivial. My guess is the deployment costs
are roughly the same for LO and MSO. Someone has to prepare the
deployment and actually do the deployment. I am addressing more this
side of the issue. The issue I believe you are addressing is the
technical side, what to we do internally to make a good LTS version for
users, again this is very important and needs serious discussion. 

 Regards,
 
 Jorge Rodríguez
 ___
 
 
 El dom, 09-10-2011 a las 12:05 -0400, planas escribió:
  Cor
  
  On Sun, 2011-10-09 at 12:05 +0200, Cor Nouws wrote: 
  
   Hi Tom,
   
   Tom Davies wrote (08-10-11 12:10)
   
At this point we could probably start thinking about longer-term
support than just 1 year.  A lot has changed this year and the future
seems much more solidly certain for TDF and LO. Regards from Tom :)
   
   No one will hold you from thinking about that. But before building 
   expectations, it is good to realise that decisions about release cycles 
   are made by the people that do the development work.
   
   Regards,
   
   
   -- 
 - Cor
 - http://nl.libreoffice.org
  
  I think we are growing to point were the issue of long term support
  probably needs to be addressed. I think this more an issue with
  corporate users rather than home/home office users. Large organizations
  dislike having to update very frequently and we need to find the best
  balance for them and us. Linux users are probably affected less because
  of the distros will provide one of the more recent versions. But Windows
  and Mac users need to update manually or in a corporate environment the
  IT department will need to roll out the new version/update. Firefox has
  received criticism for their rapid versioning from 4 to 7 in the last
  several months from corporate users.
  
  There are several possibilities. We could say every odd or even (3.3 vs
  3.4) is the LTS with support for 2 or 3 years and the other is supported
  for 1 year for example. We could say every, say third release (3.3 the
  3.6) is the LTS with support for the other version. One of the years
  releases (3.3, 3.4, and 3.5?) could be designated the LTS. Please note
  these are just ideas put out to stimulate thinking and discussion for us
  to determine what is best overall for LO and our users.
  
  Obviously, this is not an issue that can be decided without discussing
  with others such as the devs before a decision is reached but one that
  probably needs to addressing in the near future. The goal is to have a
  policy that can be used for planning by us and by users and is
  reasonable for both.
  
  
  -- 
  Jay Lozier
  jsloz...@gmail.com
  
 
 -- 
 Atentamente,
 
 Jorge Rodríguez
 
 



-- 
Jay Lozier
jsloz...@gmail.com

-- 
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+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/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


Re: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and the DVD[s] I have been working with

2011-10-09 Thread Cor Nouws

webmaster for Kracked Press Productions wrote (09-10-11 15:55)


Each line ends. If someone is still using 3.3.5 in December 2013 [13
months after it was released], they should be encouraged to upgrade to a
newer line. I do not think there will be an end of support for an old
product line, but to be honest, how long will we support the older
lines? 2 years, 3 years?


I think indeed that is the practical situation. How can we, as support 
for users, try to help with user questions as good as possible, without 
giving the idea that there is some drive to let them do an upgrade - 
unless there are of course clear technical reasons.
I think at that moment valid is what you wrote earlier in this thread - 
what do we have on practical information about features in version A or 
B (feature pages, release notes), and what are differences / fixes 
(Bugzilla , ...). That will help in this task.


Regards,

--
 - Cor
 - http://nl.libreoffice.org


--
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+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/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted



Re: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and the DVD[s] I have been working with

2011-10-09 Thread webmaster for Kracked Press Productions


Right now, updating to 3.3.4 or 3.4.3 should be done due to the security 
issues addressed in those two that the previous versions did not have.


[quote from email by Italo Vignol]
The Internet, October 4, 2011 - The Document Foundation (TDF) publishes 
some details of the security fixes included with the recently released 
LibreOffice 3.4.3, and included in the older 3.3.4 version. Following 
industry best practice, details of security fixes are withheld until 
users have been given time to migrate to the new version.

[unquote]

So unless there is a need to go to a newer version of LO, to fix 
issues/bugs/etc., then I have no problem if someone wants to stick to 
3.3.4 or 3.4.3 for another year or more.  I used 3.4.1 till about a 
month after 3.4.3 came out.  Then I installed on my Ubuntu 10.04 LTS 
desktop.  [Actually the only reason I have not gone to 11.04 was due to 
a default video/monitor issue during booting.  It set my default 
resolution to one that my monitor cannot handle, but my MoB graphics 
card could do.]


But we do need to have some guideline or policy on dealing with 
people wanting help with older version.  The blaming the older version 
for your troubles may come up when it was not the problem.  I know some 
people must have the latest versions and do not like to deal [think 
support besides run] with the older ones.  Some people might get turned 
off LO if the helper insists that the person install the newest 
version of LO if they want to get help.  We all do not want to lose any 
new users to LO just because of issues with the lists.


One reason I set up the archive site was the need for users wanting to 
go back to previous versions of LO since that one worked for their needs 
without the problems they have with the newest versions.




.

On 10/09/2011 06:26 PM, Cor Nouws wrote:

webmaster for Kracked Press Productions wrote (09-10-11 15:55)


Each line ends. If someone is still using 3.3.5 in December 2013 [13
months after it was released], they should be encouraged to upgrade to a
newer line. I do not think there will be an end of support for an old
product line, but to be honest, how long will we support the older
lines? 2 years, 3 years?


I think indeed that is the practical situation. How can we, as support 
for users, try to help with user questions as good as possible, 
without giving the idea that there is some drive to let them do an 
upgrade - unless there are of course clear technical reasons.
I think at that moment valid is what you wrote earlier in this thread 
- what do we have on practical information about features in version A 
or B (feature pages, release notes), and what are differences / fixes 
(Bugzilla , ...). That will help in this task.


Regards,




--
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+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/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted



Re: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and the DVD[s] I have been working with

2011-10-08 Thread Tom Davies
Hi :)
At this point we could probably start thinking about longer-term support than 
just 1 year.  A lot has changed this year and the future seems much more 
solidly certain for TDF and LO.  
Regards from
Tom :)


--- On Sat, 8/10/11, jorge jrodrigue...@cpcecr.com wrote:

From: jorge jrodrigue...@cpcecr.com
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and 
the DVD[s] I have been working with
To: users@global.libreoffice.org
Date: Saturday, 8 October, 2011, 0:33

Hi

    Thank you Jay and Tom for your information.

Regards,

Jorge Rodríguez
___

El vie, 07-10-2011 a las 18:49 -0400, planas escribió:
 On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 21:12 -0400, webmaster for Kracked Press
 Productions wrote: 
 
  I have had the idea for a few months now, so I figured it was time to 
  start working on it.
  
  The original NA-DVD site has a set of archive pages for the installs 
  that went into the NA-DVD[s].  There are all of the OSs and the language 
  and help packs that were linked within the default install page[s].
  
  This version of the site pages will have the contents of the DVDs, but 
  will have installs for:
  3.3.2, 3.3.3, 3.3.4
  3.4.1, 3.4.2, 3.4.3
  plus the new ones when they come out.
  
  See what you think.  I need to work on the wording to describe the 
  differences between the 3.3.x line and the 3.4.x line.  I could use some 
  words to describe what line is best to use where.  I know that soon the 
  3.4.x line will be enterprise ready and the most stable and cutting 
  edge words soon will not be the best.  Also, when 3.5.x line comes out, 
  most stable will be describing 3.4.x versions.  So maybe not using 
  that phrase would be better for marketing.
  
  http://libreoffice-na.us/multi-version/install.html
  
  Any advice could be helpful.
 
 Could describing the difference as the newer release has more features
 and is undergoing major development while the earlier release is being
 concurrently supported and updated for 1 year (whatever the long term
 support period is). Allowing users the choice of using the current
 release series or beng able to use the older series allowing them to
 upgrade at their convenience. This similar to Ubuntu's LTS release, the
 LTS is support for 3 years for Ubuntu while the other releases are
 supported for 18 months.
 
 Note Ubuntu is currently using 3.4.3 as yesterday/today, 3.3.4 was
 upgraded to 3.4.3 on my box today. 
 
  
 
 
 
 -- 
 Jay Lozier
 jsloz...@gmail.com
 

-- 
Atentamente,

Jorge Rodríguez


-- 
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+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/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

-- 
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+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/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted



Re: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and the DVD[s] I have been working with

2011-10-07 Thread Tom Davies
Hi :)
Good work chap! :)  It's good to see all that work will remain available for a 
good long time :)

I think you are thinking of Debian, this is LO and uses a different system.  
Stable and Old are not always inter-changeable.    

As far as i can tell the 3.4.x branch has never been claimed to have long-term 
support.  Patches, updates and such are never likely to be back-ported to that 
branch.  Although that is not really an issue as LO doesn't seem to do updates 
anyway.  It's the long-term support that makes something stable and thus 
useful to corporate clients.  

At the outset the 3.3.x branch was claimed to have long term support of up to 1 
year from release date.  Quite what that support means in a project that 
develops so much so fast that it has no time for minor updates is unclear.  The 
3.4.3 is claimed to be stable but again it's unclear what that means.  
Perhaps LO will decide whether to use the Debian or the Ubuntu plan or make a 
new one.  At the moment it's just unclear or at least not obvious.  

On the plus side it is relatively trivial to test new releases and then 
roll-out upgrades without messing-up peoples settings or even to revert back to 
previous releases if a serious problem happens.  People seldom need to be on 
the same release at the same time in order to share stuff but to create some 
things initially you might need the latest.  


The Ubuntu model differs from the Debian one by having strictly scheduled 
releases every 6 months.  These are it's equivalent of Development releases 
and have a limited shelf life of 'only' 18months.  Every 2 years (2006, 2008, 
2010) one of their 6 monthlies is developed as an LTS so more effort goes 
into making it more solid so that it will last longer.  More importantly during 
the 3 years after release any important patches and updates writtten for any of 
the normal 6monthlies gets back-ported to the supported LTSes and some updates 
and patches get written specifically for those LTSes.  In around 2005 or before 
it was decided that so much work was going to be focused on the LTS that there 
would only be 1 release that year and it would be pushed back 2 months to June 
making it 6.06 LTS rather than having a 6.04 LTS and a 6.10 (err 
normal/development/6monthly).  Technical support and documentation also 
continue to be developed for the LTSes
 but i think it's the updates including the back-ported ones that are the 
crucial part of claiming that a release is stable.

So, Ubuntu has a system that is clear and obvious to non-geeky corporate 
clients.  It gives them confidence in planning for the future, such as when to 
schedule a roll-out of upgrades across a large number of machines.  They also 
gain confidence knowing that if threats develop or accidents happen then 
updates will happen 'automatically' and they can rely on getting tech support 
if needed.  

Of course the flip-side, as most non-business types appreciate, is that the 
product might be better sometimes with a little more work which might take 5 
mins or might take 5 months.  Most OpenSource projects (before Ubuntu) were 
quite happy delaying releases until they were ready with the better product.  
It's more rigorous and the product has better integrity but it is exactly the 
opposite of corporate culture and totally beyond their understanding.  They see 
it as lazy and unpredictable even tho that misses the point completely.  
Ubuntu's answer was to 'freeze' development of each project at a point the 
product is good enough and then the next release hopefully contains the 
better product.  

The 3.4.3 is the best release to use.  I'm not sure it's appropriate to 
describe one branch as better than another for any particular reason now that 
the 3.4.3 is claimed to be stable (whatever they mean by that).  Existing users 
of 3.3.0 and 3.3.1 will need to start thinking about details of upgrading soon 
as their year is almost up already.  3.3.2 and 3.3.3 need to start planning if 
they haven't already.  My plan is to sitwait for the Ppa to give me a new one 
but i have already downloaded the 3.4.3 for both Windows and Debian-family 
(Ubuntu) and saved it to the network so i can upgrade if i happen to have time 
and access to a particular machine.  Not exactly a good corporate strategy and 
not a great plan for places that have a lot of machines!  

Good luck and regards from
Tom :)


--- On Fri, 7/10/11, webmaster for Kracked Press Productions 
webmas...@krackedpress.com wrote:

From: webmaster for Kracked Press Productions webmas...@krackedpress.com
Subject: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and the 
DVD[s] I have been working with
To: LibreO - Users Global users@global.libreoffice.org
Date: Friday, 7 October, 2011, 2:12


I have had the idea for a few months now, so I figured it was time to start 
working on it.

The original NA-DVD site has a set of archive pages for the installs that went 
into the NA-DVD[s].  There are all of the 

Re: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and the DVD[s] I have been working with

2011-10-07 Thread John McAtee
The site looks great.  I am interested in downloading the DVD ISO but it seems 
that the links are not yet ready.  Am I correct in thinking that I can download 
the individual packages but not the entire DVD ISO yet?  If I wrong then please 
point me to the link for the DVD ISO.
 
Thanks for all the work you are putting into this project.
 
John McAtee



From: webmaster for Kracked Press Productions webmas...@krackedpress.com
To: LibreO - Users Global users@global.libreoffice.org
Sent: Thursday, October 6, 2011 9:12 PM
Subject: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and the 
DVD[s] I have been working with


I have had the idea for a few months now, so I figured it was time to start 
working on it.

The original NA-DVD site has a set of archive pages for the installs that went 
into the NA-DVD[s].  There are all of the OSs and the language and help packs 
that were linked within the default install page[s].

This version of the site pages will have the contents of the DVDs, but will 
have installs for:
3.3.2, 3.3.3, 3.3.4
3.4.1, 3.4.2, 3.4.3
plus the new ones when they come out.

See what you think.  I need to work on the wording to describe the differences 
between the 3.3.x line and the 3.4.x line.  I could use some words to describe 
what line is best to use where.  I know that soon the 3.4.x line will be 
enterprise ready and the most stable and cutting edge words soon will 
not be the best.  Also, when 3.5.x line comes out, most stable will be 
describing 3.4.x versions.  So maybe not using that phrase would be better for 
marketing.

http://libreoffice-na.us/multi-version/install.html

Any advice could be helpful.

-- For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+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/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted




-- 
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+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/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted



Re: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and the DVD[s] I have been working with

2011-10-07 Thread drew
On Fri, 2011-10-07 at 06:13 -0700, John McAtee wrote:
 The site looks great.  I am interested in downloading the DVD ISO but it 
 seems that the links are not yet ready.  Am I correct in thinking that I can 
 download the individual packages but not the entire DVD ISO yet?  If I wrong 
 then please point me to the link for the DVD ISO.
  
 Thanks for all the work you are putting into this project.
  
Hello John

Well, there was / is DVD images planned.
- to make a long story short;
Tim (who has put in a lot of work on that site) was supposed to be
getting some help on the DVD image build side from a partner, the
partner keeps letting him, and the plan down by not finishing his
piece but that is the plan :(

As to just having that site as a repository of sorts for older binary
releases, even sans DVD images for each, seems like a good thing to have
come out of his efforts (not trying to dodge that whole 'not getting the
dvd image built step' here...) and really if you think about it the
older builds might make less sense for a full DVD sized download...

...as for the DVD image, the weekends here, maybe the latest release
version can find a way into existence during it.

//drew

 
 
 
 From: webmaster for Kracked Press Productions webmas...@krackedpress.com
 To: LibreO - Users Global users@global.libreoffice.org
 Sent: Thursday, October 6, 2011 9:12 PM
 Subject: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and the 
 DVD[s] I have been working with
 
 
 I have had the idea for a few months now, so I figured it was time to start 
 working on it.
 
 The original NA-DVD site has a set of archive pages for the installs that 
 went into the NA-DVD[s].  There are all of the OSs and the language and help 
 packs that were linked within the default install page[s].
 
 This version of the site pages will have the contents of the DVDs, but will 
 have installs for:
 3.3.2, 3.3.3, 3.3.4
 3.4.1, 3.4.2, 3.4.3
 plus the new ones when they come out.
 
 See what you think.  I need to work on the wording to describe the 
 differences between the 3.3.x line and the 3.4.x line.  I could use some 
 words to describe what line is best to use where.  I know that soon the 
 3.4.x line will be enterprise ready and the most stable and cutting 
 edge words soon will not be the best.  Also, when 3.5.x line comes out, 
 most stable will be describing 3.4.x versions.  So maybe not using that 
 phrase would be better for marketing.
 
 http://libreoffice-na.us/multi-version/install.html
 
 Any advice could be helpful.
 
 -- For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+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/users/
 All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
 deleted
 
 
 
 



-- 
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+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/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


Re: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and the DVD[s] I have been working with

2011-10-07 Thread webmaster for Kracked Press Productions


There was going to be links for the CMS version of the DVD.

http://dvd.north-america.libreofficebox.org/home/
http://north-america.libreofficebox.org/home/

You will have to find out from Drew [these lists] what the time line for 
that to happen.


I have ISOs on my system, but I have no ability to host them on my web 
page account.  They do not like a file larger than 100 Meg or so.  The 
Windows versions run about 1.9 GB and the Win/Linux/Mac one is about 3.4 
GB.  I do mail DVDs out once in a while, though, but I do not like 
eating the cost of the mailing box and postage myself.



On 10/07/2011 09:13 AM, John McAtee wrote:

The site looks great.  I am interested in downloading the DVD ISO but it seems 
that the links are not yet ready.  Am I correct in thinking that I can download 
the individual packages but not the entire DVD ISO yet?  If I wrong then please 
point me to the link for the DVD ISO.
  
Thanks for all the work you are putting into this project.
  
John McAtee





From: webmaster for Kracked Press Productionswebmas...@krackedpress.com
To: LibreO - Users Globalusers@global.libreoffice.org
Sent: Thursday, October 6, 2011 9:12 PM
Subject: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and the 
DVD[s] I have been working with


I have had the idea for a few months now, so I figured it was time to start 
working on it.

The original NA-DVD site has a set of archive pages for the installs that went into the 
NA-DVD[s].  There are all of the OSs and the language and help packs that were linked 
within the default install page[s].

This version of the site pages will have the contents of the DVDs, but will 
have installs for:
3.3.2, 3.3.3, 3.3.4
3.4.1, 3.4.2, 3.4.3
plus the new ones when they come out.

See what you think.  I need to work on the wording to describe the differences between the 3.3.x line and the 3.4.x 
line.  I could use some words to describe what line is best to use where.  I know that soon the 3.4.x line will be 
enterprise ready and the most stable and cutting edge words soon will not be the 
best.  Also, when 3.5.x line comes out, most stable will be describing 3.4.x versions.  So maybe not using 
that phrase would be better for marketing.

http://libreoffice-na.us/multi-version/install.html

Any advice could be helpful.

-- For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+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/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted







--
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+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/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted



Re: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and the DVD[s] I have been working with

2011-10-07 Thread Tom Davies
Hi :)
I really think Tim should be charging a reasonable set fee for the dvds and an 
additional amount for postage.

Beyond the obvious expenses there is time, weartear on equipment (accountants 
prefer the term depreciation) and other hidden costs.  Inevitably there are 
going to be a small percentage of people that would be good to charge a reduced 
rate or even for free so the normal charge should be enough to absorb those 
costs.  Reasonable profit to allow the project to expand a bit seems like a 
good plan

Even Richard Stallman and the GPL, LGPL and MPL agreements agree with people 
earning  a reasonable amount as long as it's not just the software that is 
being sold.  In this case it's the Dvd and packaging that would be sold.

In the dim  distant future it might be possible to run it as a proper business 
but at the moment it's just a hobby.  Still, that;s not a good reason to run at 
a loss is it?
Regards from
Tom :)

--- On Fri, 7/10/11, webmaster for Kracked Press Productions 
webmas...@krackedpress.com wrote:

From: webmaster for Kracked Press Productions webmas...@krackedpress.com
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and 
the DVD[s] I have been working with
To: users@global.libreoffice.org
Date: Friday, 7 October, 2011, 16:53


There was going to be links for the CMS version of the DVD.

http://dvd.north-america.libreofficebox.org/home/
http://north-america.libreofficebox.org/home/

You will have to find out from Drew [these lists] what the time line for 
that to happen.

I have ISOs on my system, but I have no ability to host them on my web 
page account.  They do not like a file larger than 100 Meg or so.  The 
Windows versions run about 1.9 GB and the Win/Linux/Mac one is about 3.4 
GB.  I do mail DVDs out once in a while, though, but I do not like 
eating the cost of the mailing box and postage myself.


On 10/07/2011 09:13 AM, John McAtee wrote:
 The site looks great.  I am interested in downloading the DVD ISO but it 
 seems that the links are not yet ready.  Am I correct in thinking that I can 
 download the individual packages but not the entire DVD ISO yet?  If I wrong 
 then please point me to the link for the DVD ISO.
   
 Thanks for all the work you are putting into this project.
   
 John McAtee


 
 From: webmaster for Kracked Press Productionswebmas...@krackedpress.com
 To: LibreO - Users Globalusers@global.libreoffice.org
 Sent: Thursday, October 6, 2011 9:12 PM
 Subject: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and the 
 DVD[s] I have been working with


 I have had the idea for a few months now, so I figured it was time to start 
 working on it.

 The original NA-DVD site has a set of archive pages for the installs that 
 went into the NA-DVD[s].  There are all of the OSs and the language and help 
 packs that were linked within the default install page[s].

 This version of the site pages will have the contents of the DVDs, but will 
 have installs for:
 3.3.2, 3.3.3, 3.3.4
 3.4.1, 3.4.2, 3.4.3
 plus the new ones when they come out.

 See what you think.  I need to work on the wording to describe the 
 differences between the 3.3.x line and the 3.4.x line.  I could use some 
 words to describe what line is best to use where.  I know that soon the 
 3.4.x line will be enterprise ready and the most stable and cutting 
 edge words soon will not be the best.  Also, when 3.5.x line comes out, 
 most stable will be describing 3.4.x versions.  So maybe not using that 
 phrase would be better for marketing.

 http://libreoffice-na.us/multi-version/install.html

 Any advice could be helpful.

 -- For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+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/users/
 All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
 deleted






-- 
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+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/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


-- 
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+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/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted



Re: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and the DVD[s] I have been working with

2011-10-07 Thread jorge
Hi

I think that usually some people refers that 3.3.x is more stable than
3.4.x and say too which is better for workstation and wich for
experimental. But usually forget to explain in simples and few words the
features differences between both that are very necesary to decide what
version we would use.

I suggest to make a list features that 3.4.x has and hasn't has 3.3.x.
I suggest include a general descripcion about code changes that not take
change in features but yes in efficient.

Regards,

Jorge Rodríguez
___


El jue, 06-10-2011 a las 21:12 -0400, webmaster for Kracked Press
Productions escribió:
 I have had the idea for a few months now, so I figured it was time to 
 start working on it.
 
 The original NA-DVD site has a set of archive pages for the installs 
 that went into the NA-DVD[s].  There are all of the OSs and the language 
 and help packs that were linked within the default install page[s].
 
 This version of the site pages will have the contents of the DVDs, but 
 will have installs for:
 3.3.2, 3.3.3, 3.3.4
 3.4.1, 3.4.2, 3.4.3
 plus the new ones when they come out.
 
 See what you think.  I need to work on the wording to describe the 
 differences between the 3.3.x line and the 3.4.x line.  I could use some 
 words to describe what line is best to use where.  I know that soon the 
 3.4.x line will be enterprise ready and the most stable and cutting 
 edge words soon will not be the best.  Also, when 3.5.x line comes out, 
 most stable will be describing 3.4.x versions.  So maybe not using 
 that phrase would be better for marketing.
 
 http://libreoffice-na.us/multi-version/install.html
 
 Any advice could be helpful.
 

-- 
Atentamente,

Jorge Rodríguez


-- 
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+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/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


Re: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and the DVD[s] I have been working with

2011-10-07 Thread jorge
Hi

And simple list about bugs solve in 3.4.x and exist in 3.3.x

Thanks for your idea and job,

Regards,

Jorge Rodríguez
___


El vie, 07-10-2011 a las 15:45 -0600, jorge escribió:
 Hi
 
   I think that usually some people refers that 3.3.x is more stable than
 3.4.x and say too which is better for workstation and wich for
 experimental. But usually forget to explain in simples and few words the
 features differences between both that are very necesary to decide what
 version we would use.
 
   I suggest to make a list features that 3.4.x has and hasn't has 3.3.x.
 I suggest include a general descripcion about code changes that not take
 change in features but yes in efficient.
 
 Regards,
 
 Jorge Rodríguez
 ___
 
 
 El jue, 06-10-2011 a las 21:12 -0400, webmaster for Kracked Press
 Productions escribió:
  I have had the idea for a few months now, so I figured it was time to 
  start working on it.
  
  The original NA-DVD site has a set of archive pages for the installs 
  that went into the NA-DVD[s].  There are all of the OSs and the language 
  and help packs that were linked within the default install page[s].
  
  This version of the site pages will have the contents of the DVDs, but 
  will have installs for:
  3.3.2, 3.3.3, 3.3.4
  3.4.1, 3.4.2, 3.4.3
  plus the new ones when they come out.
  
  See what you think.  I need to work on the wording to describe the 
  differences between the 3.3.x line and the 3.4.x line.  I could use some 
  words to describe what line is best to use where.  I know that soon the 
  3.4.x line will be enterprise ready and the most stable and cutting 
  edge words soon will not be the best.  Also, when 3.5.x line comes out, 
  most stable will be describing 3.4.x versions.  So maybe not using 
  that phrase would be better for marketing.
  
  http://libreoffice-na.us/multi-version/install.html
  
  Any advice could be helpful.
  
 

-- 
Atentamente,

Jorge Rodríguez


-- 
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+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/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


Re: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and the DVD[s] I have been working with

2011-10-07 Thread Tom Davies
Hi :)
Hopefully just savign the Release Notes pages would do the trick well enough?  
Regards from
Tom :)

--- On Fri, 7/10/11, jorge jrodrigue...@cpcecr.com wrote:

From: jorge jrodrigue...@cpcecr.com
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and 
the DVD[s] I have been working with
To: users@global.libreoffice.org
Date: Friday, 7 October, 2011, 22:48

Hi

    And simple list about bugs solve in 3.4.x and exist in 3.3.x

    Thanks for your idea and job,

Regards,

Jorge Rodríguez
___


El vie, 07-10-2011 a las 15:45 -0600, jorge escribió:
 Hi
 
     I think that usually some people refers that 3.3.x is more stable than
 3.4.x and say too which is better for workstation and wich for
 experimental. But usually forget to explain in simples and few words the
 features differences between both that are very necesary to decide what
 version we would use.
 
     I suggest to make a list features that 3.4.x has and hasn't has 3.3.x.
 I suggest include a general descripcion about code changes that not take
 change in features but yes in efficient.
 
 Regards,
 
 Jorge Rodríguez
 ___
 
 
 El jue, 06-10-2011 a las 21:12 -0400, webmaster for Kracked Press
 Productions escribió:
  I have had the idea for a few months now, so I figured it was time to 
  start working on it.
  
  The original NA-DVD site has a set of archive pages for the installs 
  that went into the NA-DVD[s].  There are all of the OSs and the language 
  and help packs that were linked within the default install page[s].
  
  This version of the site pages will have the contents of the DVDs, but 
  will have installs for:
  3.3.2, 3.3.3, 3.3.4
  3.4.1, 3.4.2, 3.4.3
  plus the new ones when they come out.
  
  See what you think.  I need to work on the wording to describe the 
  differences between the 3.3.x line and the 3.4.x line.  I could use some 
  words to describe what line is best to use where.  I know that soon the 
  3.4.x line will be enterprise ready and the most stable and cutting 
  edge words soon will not be the best.  Also, when 3.5.x line comes out, 
  most stable will be describing 3.4.x versions.  So maybe not using 
  that phrase would be better for marketing.
  
  http://libreoffice-na.us/multi-version/install.html
  
  Any advice could be helpful.
  
 

-- 
Atentamente,

Jorge Rodríguez


-- 
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+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/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

-- 
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+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/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted



Re: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and the DVD[s] I have been working with

2011-10-07 Thread planas
On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 21:12 -0400, webmaster for Kracked Press
Productions wrote: 

 I have had the idea for a few months now, so I figured it was time to 
 start working on it.
 
 The original NA-DVD site has a set of archive pages for the installs 
 that went into the NA-DVD[s].  There are all of the OSs and the language 
 and help packs that were linked within the default install page[s].
 
 This version of the site pages will have the contents of the DVDs, but 
 will have installs for:
 3.3.2, 3.3.3, 3.3.4
 3.4.1, 3.4.2, 3.4.3
 plus the new ones when they come out.
 
 See what you think.  I need to work on the wording to describe the 
 differences between the 3.3.x line and the 3.4.x line.  I could use some 
 words to describe what line is best to use where.  I know that soon the 
 3.4.x line will be enterprise ready and the most stable and cutting 
 edge words soon will not be the best.  Also, when 3.5.x line comes out, 
 most stable will be describing 3.4.x versions.  So maybe not using 
 that phrase would be better for marketing.
 
 http://libreoffice-na.us/multi-version/install.html
 
 Any advice could be helpful.

Could describing the difference as the newer release has more features
and is undergoing major development while the earlier release is being
concurrently supported and updated for 1 year (whatever the long term
support period is). Allowing users the choice of using the current
release series or beng able to use the older series allowing them to
upgrade at their convenience. This similar to Ubuntu's LTS release, the
LTS is support for 3 years for Ubuntu while the other releases are
supported for 18 months.

Note Ubuntu is currently using 3.4.3 as yesterday/today, 3.3.4 was
upgraded to 3.4.3 on my box today. 

 



-- 
Jay Lozier
jsloz...@gmail.com

-- 
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+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/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


Re: [libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and the DVD[s] I have been working with

2011-10-07 Thread jorge
Hi

Thank you Jay and Tom for your information.

Regards,

Jorge Rodríguez
___

El vie, 07-10-2011 a las 18:49 -0400, planas escribió:
 On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 21:12 -0400, webmaster for Kracked Press
 Productions wrote: 
 
  I have had the idea for a few months now, so I figured it was time to 
  start working on it.
  
  The original NA-DVD site has a set of archive pages for the installs 
  that went into the NA-DVD[s].  There are all of the OSs and the language 
  and help packs that were linked within the default install page[s].
  
  This version of the site pages will have the contents of the DVDs, but 
  will have installs for:
  3.3.2, 3.3.3, 3.3.4
  3.4.1, 3.4.2, 3.4.3
  plus the new ones when they come out.
  
  See what you think.  I need to work on the wording to describe the 
  differences between the 3.3.x line and the 3.4.x line.  I could use some 
  words to describe what line is best to use where.  I know that soon the 
  3.4.x line will be enterprise ready and the most stable and cutting 
  edge words soon will not be the best.  Also, when 3.5.x line comes out, 
  most stable will be describing 3.4.x versions.  So maybe not using 
  that phrase would be better for marketing.
  
  http://libreoffice-na.us/multi-version/install.html
  
  Any advice could be helpful.
 
 Could describing the difference as the newer release has more features
 and is undergoing major development while the earlier release is being
 concurrently supported and updated for 1 year (whatever the long term
 support period is). Allowing users the choice of using the current
 release series or beng able to use the older series allowing them to
 upgrade at their convenience. This similar to Ubuntu's LTS release, the
 LTS is support for 3 years for Ubuntu while the other releases are
 supported for 18 months.
 
 Note Ubuntu is currently using 3.4.3 as yesterday/today, 3.3.4 was
 upgraded to 3.4.3 on my box today. 
 
  
 
 
 
 -- 
 Jay Lozier
 jsloz...@gmail.com
 

-- 
Atentamente,

Jorge Rodríguez


-- 
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+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/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


[libreoffice-users] Working on an archive site/pages for LO and the DVD[s] I have been working with

2011-10-06 Thread webmaster for Kracked Press Productions


I have had the idea for a few months now, so I figured it was time to 
start working on it.


The original NA-DVD site has a set of archive pages for the installs 
that went into the NA-DVD[s].  There are all of the OSs and the language 
and help packs that were linked within the default install page[s].


This version of the site pages will have the contents of the DVDs, but 
will have installs for:

3.3.2, 3.3.3, 3.3.4
3.4.1, 3.4.2, 3.4.3
plus the new ones when they come out.

See what you think.  I need to work on the wording to describe the 
differences between the 3.3.x line and the 3.4.x line.  I could use some 
words to describe what line is best to use where.  I know that soon the 
3.4.x line will be enterprise ready and the most stable and cutting 
edge words soon will not be the best.  Also, when 3.5.x line comes out, 
most stable will be describing 3.4.x versions.  So maybe not using 
that phrase would be better for marketing.


http://libreoffice-na.us/multi-version/install.html

Any advice could be helpful.

--
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+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/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted