Hi :) "Thanks for the flowers"/approval which i've snipped. It's a shock to finally agree on something! :))
The LTS approach was a new way of dealing with an old problem. The old and still current problem is that projects are pulled in 2 opposing directions; 1. exciting and new developments, fashion, bling 2. stay with something familiar and see it mature. NOT having to constantly work at it. That is probably why Redhat and Debian (and family) and many others (even [shudders] Microsoft and to a lesser extent Apple) provide a version that basically stays the same for years. Heck, many places grumble about 'having to' upgrade from Xp because it 'only' lasted 10 years! Some organisations happily pay millions per year extra purely in order to be able to stay with the same old Xp and STILL haven't developed a strategy for upgrading. Arch and others attempt to deal with the problem by doing rolling releases - which brings it's own set of problems - as Windows 10 users and Microsoft will doubtless be learning afresh over the next couple of years. Arch has already long ago grokked this so MS could learn valuable lessons from them but i think we all know they can't learn wisdom from outside, unless they really have changed. So in answer to your question to Alex; "Yes". Many places would appreciate updates rather than to keep demanding their Sys. Admins have to keep re-installing new upgrades. It'd also be great if there were some sort of "Super Still" branch, like Debian, or Redhat (and many others) that kept getting updates for 3-4 years. So that organisations could install the Super Still branch on new systems in complete confidence that they wouldn't need to touch the system again for a couple years. There are other cases where people don't have broadband for downloading full upgrades but could do with having a system they could rely on for years. European city-dwellers might not quite realise what it's like without broadband. I think it's interesting that the super-rich share a problem in common with the desperately isolated and cut-off. One which is largely addressed by almost all of Gnu&Linux but not by LibreOffice. Regards from Tom :) <snip /> > > Also you might add that TDF does not offer LTS because TDF is not a > business and therefore has no incentive in a LTS version which only makes > sense if you monetize it. The poster example of this is Canonical and > Ubuntu LTS. Canonical makes money on LTS and is only able to do so because > the LTS itself is a profitable business. Otherwise you would not even hear > of it. Businesses looking for something very similar to a LTS version of > LibreOffice can contact our certified developers and their companies though. > > Best, > > Charles. > > <snip /> > -- 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
