Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2014 Archives by date, by thread · List index


On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 11:44 PM, Charles-H. Schulz
<charles.schulz@documentfoundation.org> wrote:
I strongly advocate against it; it would only create more confusion and
continue into the storyline that fresh=unstable and stable=good.

Hmm.. perhaps the word "stable" is problematic in this situation. If
we call the branch with less churn 'stable,' that does imply something
about the stability of other branches that are under more active
development.


No one puts an older software branch in front of the more recent branch.
Does MS Office advertise MS Office 2010? :-)

Good point, although I think our situation might be a bit different. Consider:

* We push updates to the LO 'stable' branch. Does Microsoft push the
same kinds of updates to Office 2010?

* (I believe) we recommend our 'stable' branch for enterprise
deployment. Does Microsoft recommend Office 2010 for enterprise
deployment?

In some ways this might just boil down to the question of: "What's our
use case for the 'stable' branch?"

Cheers,
--R

-- 
Robinson Tryon
LibreOffice Community Outreach Herald
Senior QA Bug Wrangler
The Document Foundation
qubit@libreoffice.org

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: website+unsubscribe@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/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Context


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.