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

Based on the following ESC meeting discussion:

+ got marketing to announce what is the next major version on their mailing list
  + some discussion on switching to year.month scheme
  + extension compat checks might be affected
  + generator version in odf files
+ perhaps disentangle internal, strictly monotonically increasing numbers, from outside marketing release name? + just a single increment, for the internal number? then go for date-based release
  + going for year-num, loses some marketing splash
  + then leave it to marketing, to decide - at least no technical blockers

and on the following additional info from team members:

* rather switch to scheme like Ubuntu
+ changing to that is feasible for spring release as long as versions can be compared numerically
  * update-check doesn't use version numbers but git-hash
  * appstores can use completely independent version numbers/version codes
  * download pages are controlled by us/we can use whatever
* build process/code doesn't care itself but some scripts around that will need updating, but certainly not a huge effort (only LO parts that need changing is the about-dialogs / minor things that show the version or when passing the version to web-help) * e.g. bugzilla notifications, tools that work on branch-names or similar needs adjustments in addition
  * FOSDEM/spring gives more time to prepare artwork, etc

The decision is to stay with the current 7.x family, and call the next version - due in August - LibreOffice 7.6.

At the same time, announce that this will be the last version following the "old" numbering scheme, without providing clues for the following numbering scheme (which will be based on the year.month paradigm).

Just a couple of notes from the previous discussion:

1. LibreOffice is a commodity because office suites are a commodity, and LibreOffice is an office suite. The fact that community members do not perceive LibreOffice as a commodity does not affect the market around us and especially market analysts, who are the reference for large users (some of which pay a substantial amount of LibreOffice development through ecosystem companies).

2. Please remember that community members count for a tiny percentage of LibreOffice users, and are not affecting in any way the perception of the majority of users (who have been mis-informed and mis-educated by a single company for at least 40 years, based on a strategy which at the time it started was clear only to the evil genius of Bill Gates).

3. Marketing is a profession as much as development is a profession (and of course other tasks such as design, localization, quality assurance, and many others) and has to be respected and trusted.

4. The time when marketing was a task for secretaries or CEO's mistress (met several of them during my professiona life) is gone since the 80s and will never be back.

5. People who never contribute to mailing list discussions about marketing decisions with constructive inputs - actually, most of them are never contributing with any input - but are then extremely quick in criticizing any marketing decision are warmly invited to start counting up to (one quadrillion) before writing their next useless comment (even if they are contributing in a significant way to other areas of the prokect).

Best regards, Italo
Italo Vignoli - LibreOffice Marketing & PR
mobile/signal +39.348.5653829 - email
GPG Key ID - 0xAAB8D5C0
DB75 1534 3FD0 EA5F 56B5 FDA6 DE82 934C AAB8 D5C0

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.