Re: [libreoffice-marketing] LibreOffice version offerings of the Download page

Hi Marc, Jean, *,

Marc Paré wrote (07-04-12 03:09)

> There was some talk recently and, also a while ago, about the Download
> page and which version(s) should be offered by default of the page. I
> think we should revisit the logic of this page.

Well, there has indeed been a long and extensive discussion before and 
during the change of the download page.

> We are presently suggesting and offering visitors to the site the
> default of our "most recent version" of LibreOffice. While this is great
> for larger feedback results for de-bugging it does not necessarily
> present a good choice for those looking for a stable, solid and reliable
> document application for their work or office deployment.

It is not said that with 3.6.0 it will be added there immediately.
Also, I have a proposal that I should work out for some time, to make a 
clear(er) link to release notes and release policy.
And people doing deployments in production environments are considered 
to read those.

> Although some other software packages offer their product on a release
> cycle much like ours - most notably the Mozilla group - our product is
> unique in that LibreOffice is in many cases used by groups or
> individuals where the resulting end-user document(s) are clearly
> dependent on the use of a quality-assured application. In short, an
> application that does not add any formatting error to the end product.

Yes.

> While any deployment of LibreOffice would sensibly involve advanced
> planning where the weight of using the "most recent version" as opposed
> to a more seemingly "solid previous version" (this, hopefully the norm),
> I do not believe that we are giving enough warning to individual users
> of the risks behind using our "most recent version" as opposed to an
> earlier "solid performing version". I believe that such a warning should
> appear on our Download page.

I would dare to say that 3.5.x is in better shape then 3.4.x
Nevertheless, a change that makes people more aware of choices is OK, as 
long as it is not clumsy or misleading.
So maybe it's a good idea that when the little improvements that I 
suggested are there, that we then again look at your suggestion below. 
Does that make sense as first step?

> I would then propose the following minimal changes to the Download page
> in order to address this issue:
>
> Rework the sentence: "LibreOffice Linux - rpm (x86_64), version 3.5.2,
> English (US). Not the version you wanted? Change System, Version or
> Language" which seems to span/draw the equivalent of 2 lines on users'
> monitors to:
>
> "LibreOffice Linux - rpm (x86_64), most recent version 3.5.2, English
> (US). Not the version you wanted? Change System, Previous Stable Version
> or Language (Release Notes Details)" <--- the "Release Notes Details
> would link to the http://www.libreoffice.org/download/release-notes/ page
>
> This should still keep sentence to 2 lines on the users' monitors and,
> at the very least, allow users time to reflect of their choice of
> versions before hitting the default download buttons.


The previous discussion was simultaneously on the website-list. And when 
reopening the discussion, I think it is helpful to add the people active 
before to as cc in the mail.

Regards,

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


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+help@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