Marc Paré wrote (10-04-12 15:46)
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.
I disagree that it has to be as soon as possible.
There has been many months, maybe even a year, between the initial
requests and ideas for making our download suitable for average users
and the fix. (I remember myself late in the nights somewhere between
Christmas and and New years eve, in my vacation, picking this whole
So I fail to see where the urgency is now.
As written before: there have been long and extensive discussions. And
not only that, also :
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.
a. the 3.5. branch is stable. And in many aspects better then the 3.4
b. Anyone leading a serious deployment will read the release notes and
(Hmm, looks as if I start to repeat myself. Not something I am usually
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.
It is an artificial distinction to talk about 'stable' and 'in
For the non stable we have the pre-releases and the dailies.
We need to rework the language to avoid such risks.
General remark (not meant for you personally):
I think the woes about bugs in 3.5 is overdone. It might easily become
sickening and counter productive. Rather then just counting numbers,
better triaging, bundling en description of issues is helpful.
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.
There was a very large discussion that led to the change of the page.
And I think that it's not good to change it over and again, without
respect to the previous discussion.
If there are new facts, or previously not noticed insights and such, it
is useful to reopen the discussion of course.
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org
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
Impressum (Legal Info)
: 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