Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2

Tom,

Hoping this will be the last time we discuss this on the marketing list,
and so that we can move on to actual marketing topics and work....

Le vendredi 05 octobre 2012 à 09:26 +0100, Tom Davies a écrit :
> Hi :)
> I'm sorry but that only seems to confirm what i have been saying :(  Obviously i am wrong but 
> where is my mistake?  
>
> When you say 
> 1.  "In each LibreOffice series, over the various minor releases, hundreds of bugs are fixed." it 
> suggests, to me, that 'hundreds' of bugs are found at the beginning of a series.  Would that be 
> around the 3.x.0, 3.x.1, 3.x.2 and 3.x.3?  The "various minor releases" are that 3rd figure? 

Yes.

>  So as that 3rd figure increases the number of fixed bugs increases?  So as we get to the .4s, 
> .5s and onwards there are usually less bugs that cause problems?  

Yes.

> 2.  "Bugs that have been introduced by making new features."  When do new features get added?  In 
> my stupidity i have assumed that new features are mostly added at the beginning of the series, in 
> the 3.x.0 release, maybe some in the 3.x.1 

that's correct (most of the time).

> if they were not quite ready in time or some last minute hiccup meant they couldn't be active in 
> the .0.  However i could be completely wrong.  Are a roughly equal amount of new features added 
> at each "minor release"?

no (see above).

>   or is the .0 chosen as the best time to incorporate a load of new features?

Keep in mind that the releases happen on a fixed schedule, and by fixed
I mean scheduled ahead of time. Take a look here:
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleasePlan
and http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Release_Criteria


> 3.  The rest of the paragraph seems to be things that both branches have in common.  "Bugs that 
> have been introduced by improvements in code, performance.
> Bugs that have become visible because other bugs were fixed. Bugs from
> external reasons, bugs from ..
> - What is a simple annoyance for the
> one user, someone knowing ways to work around it in ample seconds, can
> be a serious bug for someone with less computer skills.".  Possibly a bit more at the start of a 
> series and at the start (the .0s, .1s) perhaps also affecting reasonably skilled users that 
> perhaps aren't LO devs.  But basically that paragraph-fragment seems to cover all minor-point 
> releases including the first.  
>
> 4.  "allows people  ... that can handle bugs (...)
> more easily, to use the newer versions and benefit from the
> improvements and new features that it offers."  Are these newer versions the start of the series? 
>  (the .0s, .1s, .2s?)  Or is that referring to every minor-point release?
>
> 5.  "so that at a certain time it will be ready for more conservative, more careful, users and 
> organisations.".  Does this mean that more conservative users should not use LO at all until the 
> series has settled down or do they just have to suffer through the problems of the early 
> minor-point releases in the series or might they be better staying with the older branch's more 
> recent minor-point releases such as the .4s, .5s, .6s?  
>
> See?  I think this point 5 is where i am going wrong.  I have been thinking that it's better for 
> "conservative, more careful, users" to stick with the older branches latest releases.  Obviously 
> (to you and Charles) i am wrong and there is no need for the older branch.  Or is there?


No. The older branch is there for a reason (that you actually already
outlined yourself) , but the concern, and the *wrong* message to spread
here is that somehow the new branch is dangerous and should not be used.
The new branch is usable, professional and by no means experimental.
Also, the way it improves is by testing and by having a large userbase.
So what's important to understand here is that the older branch is in a
sense for "enterprise users" who wants less innovation and needs higher
stability, but we need a broad user base of the new branch for better
adoption, more bug detection, etc. The new branch is, again, by no means
experimental. Before we release anything, there are alphas, betas,
developer builds, release candidates, etc. 

What is thus important for us *here in marketing* is to make sure we
advertise the new branch and stop explaining there are problems with it.
There are distinct benefits for each branch, that's true, but we must
push the new branch and its features (we in marketing), and have a
coherent message on the older branch ("more conservative users" is a
good start for a concept).


>   
>
>
> Just to make it clear to anyone new that i DO NOT often find any problems with LO.  It knocks the 
> socks off MS Office.  There does tend to be quite a spike around the release of the new series 
> until it reaches around 3.x.4.  However, i overhear more grumbles about MS Office from MS-fanboys 
> in my little town than i hear from LO's international, global, world-spanning users support list 
> in the course of an average day.  
>
> Also bear in mind that "you can't make omelettes without breaking eggs".  LO makes huge 
> improvements all the time and in many ways already surpasses MS Office in terms of quality of 
> final documents produced and ease of producing them.  


You cannot imagine how true your words are... LibreOffice builds on a
legacy of 10 million lines of code, and everytime we remove or change
something, weird things happen. But we'll get through that eventually.

Charles.


> Regards from
> Tom :)  
>
>
> --- On Thu, 4/10/12, Cor Nouws <oolst@nouenoff.nl> wrote:
>
> From: Cor Nouws <oolst@nouenoff.nl>
> Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Stable? Seriously?? Fw: [tdf-announce] The Document 
> Foundation announces LibreOffice 3.6.2
> To: "marketing@global.libreoffice.org" <marketing@global.libreoffice.org>
> Cc: "charles.schulz@documentfoundation.org" <charles.schulz@documentfoundation.org>
> Date: Thursday, 4 October, 2012, 22:45
>
> Hi,
>
> Tom Davies wrote (04-10-12 20:28)
> > Hi :) Seriously.  What is the reason for having 2 branches?
> > [...]
>
> Ah well, who am I to say that you can't understand it. Though the way this thread was started, 
> does not show much (will for) understanding, IMHO. But OK, brief...
>
> - In each LibreOffice series, over the various minor releases, hundreds of bugs are fixed.
> Bugs that have their origin in the inherited OOo code (registered alone there were many 
> thousands). Bugs that have been introduced by making new features. Bugs that have been introduced 
> by improvements in code, performance. Bugs that have become visible because other bugs were 
> fixed. Bugs from external reasons, bugs from ..
> - What is a simple annoyance for the one user, someone knowing ways to work around it in ample 
> seconds, can be a serious bug for someone with less computer skills.
> - Simply having two series, allows people and (smaller) organisations that can handle bugs (...) 
> more easily, to use the newer versions and benefit from the improvements and new features that it 
> offers.
> And it allows them to help with further improvements in that series of LibreOffice, so that at a 
> certain time it will be ready for more conservative, more careful, users and organisations.
>
> I tend to do nearly all my professional work (quotations, presentations, reports, mailings ...) 
> in beta's/ dailies / developer builds. It's rare that that gives me too much trouble, or causes 
> lost of work. It does cause me spending time on trying reporting carefully written bug-reports 
> ;-)  But that's only me, and there's of course many functions that I only touch seldom or not at 
> all.
>
> Cheers,
>
>
> --  - Cor
>  - http://nl.libreoffice.org
>  - www.librelex.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




-- 
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