Hi :) I usually get mails from the Marketing List but didn't see any discussion about the new ideas for branch names. If i had i might have mentioned that Fresh vs Stagnant branch held some unfortunate connotations that might not have been obvious. Regards from Tom :)
On 6 August 2014 20:57, Paul <paulste...@afrihost.co.za> wrote: > > > > On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 20:54:10 +0200 > "Charles-H. Schulz" <charles.sch...@documentfoundation.org> wrote: > > > Paul, > > > > The fresh branch is stable enough for everyone to use. LibreOffice > > does not pilot planes, it does not usually crash, it does the job. > > There are people who want newer features and people who want more > > tested versions. There's food for everyone. > > Yes, there is, and no one is saying any different. In fact, I am saying > that there are people who want both, and so *both* should be offered. > But by your own admission, one of those branches is "more stable". The > difference might be slight, but it is enough for the people behind LO > to continue to offer it when the newer, more featureful branch is also > being offered. > > So for me first prize would be to have both branches as equal downloads > on the LO download page. With a clear, concise explanation of what each > offers, and a link to a slightly longer, fuller explanation. That is > exactly what I am proposing should be done. > > But barring that, if LO wants to keep a single download as the primary > download, as it currently is, then I am firm in my belief that the > primary download should not be the less stable branch, but should > instead be the more stable branch. > > More experienced users will know where to look for the version they > require, but it is my belief that new users, the kind that will simply > click on the big shiny download button, prefer stability over features. > In the case of an office suite like LO, how much of the new features do > they even use? Of course people want new features, I just think that > new users would prefer stability, or even better yet, a clearly > explained choice, rather than features at the expense of stability. If > you have statistics to show otherwise, I'm sure you would have > presented them by now. If you disagree, that is of course fine, but it > remains purely our individual opinions until someone presents some > pertinent facts. Although as far as I can tell from the responses, it > seems most people here agree with me, so if I were the marketing team, I > would give it careful consideration. > > > Now: if you have ideas for new names, etc. you are welcome to > > contribute to our marketing team. > > Well, this particular discussion was about how the downloads are > presented, not about the names for each branch, and I have already made > my opinions on the branch names clear, but I will reiterate them here > for clarity: > > "Still" should be "Stable" > > "Fresh" *can* stay the same, but should rather be "Current" or > "Development" > > Feel free to pass that on to the marketing team. I don't think I will > be joining another mailing list, one with an agenda that I am largely > not interested in, just to contribute that. This discussion was opened > here, and I contributed my opinions; I am happy leaving it at that. I'm > sure the right people are aware of this discussion, or, if not, that > someone who is on both lists will pass along our sentiments. > > Paul > > > > > > Best, > > > > Charles. > > > > > > Le Wed, 6 Aug 2014 20:07:41 +0200, > > Paul <paulste...@afrihost.co.za> a écrit : > > > > > Just to add another point... (see inline) > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 20:04:56 +0200 > > > Paul <paulste...@afrihost.co.za> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 19:01:19 +0200 > > > > Florian Reisinger <flo...@libreoffice.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Tom, > > > > > > > > > > If we do not find the bugs in the fresh version, they won't be > > > > > resolved until the rename to Stable/Still. If less use Fresh, > > > > > the quality of the next stable will be lower.... Does this help? > > > > > > > > That is true, but it still seems dangerous to push new users > > > > towards Fresh. If users start with Stable, then, after learning > > > > that it is stable, are pushed towards Fresh to get newer > > > > features, then the ones who want stability won't move across and > > > > will be happy, and the ones who want new features will move, > > > > knowing there is stability to fall back on, and so will also be > > > > happy. Should they find that everything works, they will be happy > > > > with new features, and should they find instability, they will be > > > > happy to fall back on the stable version, knowing that they had > > > > taken a *slight* risk. > > > > > > > > Conversely, if you push all new people to Fresh, any who find no > > > > bugs will be happy, but any that find bugs will have the > > > > impression that LO is buggy and unstable, and won't necessarily > > > > know about Stable to fall back on. Those that are told about > > > > Stable will undoubtedly grumble about the fact that they should > > > > have been told about it in the first place. > > > > > > > > I'm not saying that this is a simple matter, just that in my > > > > opinion it is far better to offer the Stable branch as the > > > > default install, and urge users to try out the Fresh branch when > > > > they start asking about features. Once they've gotten as far as > > > > asking about features, they're already far enough in the process > > > > to get help should there be any unexpected problems with Fresh. > > > > > > They're also far enough along in the process to offer bug reports... > > > > > > > Also, giving proper explanations > > > > (well, proper brief explanations with a link to a more detailed > > > > explanation) on the download page lets new users evaluate the > > > > choice themselves, and that way they are less likely to be angry > > > > when caught out by something. > > > > > > > > There should still be enough users of Fresh in this scenario to > > > > allow for the needed user testing. > > > > > > > > > > > > Paul > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Liebe Grüße, / Yours, > > > > > Florian Reisinger > > > > > > > > > > > Am 06.08.2014 um 11:17 schrieb Tom Davies <tomc...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi :) > > > > > > This seems to be contradicting what Charles is saying. > > > > > > > > > > > > Also is it really a good policy to force new and unwitting > > > > > > users to act as guinea-pigs? Should all new users be pushed > > > > > > into finding and fixing bugs? Would it really be bad to give > > > > > > them a clear and easy route to a less buggy version? Regards > > > > > > from Tom :) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@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 > > -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@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
