Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2012 Archives by date, by thread · List index

Hi Cor,

Le 2012-04-10 03:59, Cor Nouws a écrit :

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 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.

I think that there should be some kind of rewording of the text in the download page done as soon as possible as I don't think that the text that is on the Download page does not go far enough to warn users of the two offerings of LibreOffice 3.5.x and 3.4.x branches. There should be, at the very least, a demonstrated effort from our group of the intended use of the two versions.

At this point, the download page does not inform the user of the stable 3.4.x branch for large deployments or users looking for such a product. I suspect that, in some countries, the language used on the download page would not be considered "consumer-friendly" enough to warn people of the risks of downloading an "in-development" version of software when a stable version is available. We need to rework the language to avoid such risks. We don't need a lot of changes to the text, we just need to show that we make the effort to offer the information at the point of Download (page).

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.

I put this on the marketing list as this discussion has more to do about the rationalizing of the language used on the Download page from a marketing point of view.

I'll leave a note on the website list pointing back to this thread.



Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


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.