Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2023 Archives by date, by thread · List index

Hi Mike

Some good points, as always.

Regardless of the version numbering system, it looks like one imperative is to get people to update 
before their current version falls out of support.

While I don't rush to install the latest version on release day I don't like to rely on my 
distribution's repository as it often lags well behind. I download and install from the LO website. 
I often get a message within the LO UI informing me a newer version is available, but I still have 
to perform an uninstall followed by a full installation from .deb files using dpkg to perform that 

I may be naive in asking this, but is it feasible to develop a means of performing an upgrade from 
within the application? If it were just a matter of clicking on a dialog then sitting back for a 
couple of minutes or so, followed perhaps by a reboot, there would be little incentive NOT to 



 LibreOffice - Free and open source office suite: LibreOffice Website<>
 Respects your privacy, and gives you back control over your data​
From: Mike Saunders <>
Sent: 07 April 2023 09:23
To: Eyal Rozenberg <>; TDF Devs <>; TDF Marketing 
<>; TDF Design <>
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Re: [libreoffice-design] Moving to LibreOffice 8?


On 06.04.23 22:12, Eyal Rozenberg wrote:

Great, what's the problem? Why should we be in a rush to get existing
users to upgrade from 7.5 to 7.6?

Well, one argument is that we have very limited resources to support two
branches. LibreOffice 7.5 won't be around forever, so at some point
we'll need to push people to update to 7.6/8.0, as the previous version
won't be maintained and could potentially have security issues.

On Reddit, social media etc. we see lots of posts from people using
ancient versions of LibreOffice, and have no idea that there are newer
major releases. There are various reasons for that, but IMO we need to
keep people up-to-date. Not for quarterly sales targets as a
CompuGlobalHyperMegaCorp, as you say, but because it's better for us all
in the project when people are using maintained and supported versions.

we should be at least skeptical about copying MS behavior regarding MSO
in which their marketing wing is calling the shots.

Agreed that we shouldn't copy problematic behaviour, but if our goal is
to raise awareness of LibreOffice as much as possible, and get it into
as many hands as possible (and I know not everyone agrees with that),
then we have to be aware of the market in which we're operating, and

IMO, it's a lot like the whole "using proprietary services to reach
users" debate. Arguably, as a FOSS project, we should avoid closed
platforms like Twitter and Facebook. But we make a compromise and are
active on those platforms, because they are very effective for reaching
new users and communicating with them.

So I think our marketing has to balance these things. If we only care
about the technical side, we could use XTerm-style numbering (just keep
bumping a single number with every release). But as if we want to reach
Microsoft Office users and make a compelling argument to them, our
marketing has to fit.

And I know that Italo has a ton of experience and knowledge in this
field, so his perspective on this is very valuable IMO.


To unsubscribe e-mail to:
Posting guidelines + more:<>
List archive:<>
Privacy Policy:<>

To unsubscribe e-mail to:
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
Privacy Policy:


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.