On 31/05/11 1:45 AM, webmaster for Kracked Press Productions wrote:
On 05/30/2011 08:38 AM, Gianluca Turconi wrote:
Hello Alex,
In data 30 maggio 2011 alle ore 11:41:51, Alexander Thurgood
<alex.thurgood@gmail.com> ha scritto:
Ultimately, it is not merely the remarks that Michael made, that
I may,
or may not, have misinterpreted. As I mentioned, it transpires from
other mailing lists, the dev irc channel, the bug reports, the
decisions
to consider any given bug as a stopper or not.
I've lurked this specific argument in the dev/steering discuss/French
mailing lists when you were commenting Meeks's statement.
Now, I'm working with other people on this project:
http://www.mail-archive.com/projects@libreoffice.org/msg00241.html
During a lengthy and indeed very interesting discussion with Italo
Vignoli, Andrea Pescetti and others in the Italian discuss mailing
list (for people who knows Italian:
http://www.mail-archive.com/discuss@it.libreoffice.org/msg00104.html
) , I finally wondered: will the relashionship between the Community
LibO *product* and the commercially supported ones
(Novell/Canonical/Red Hat/put-here-your-preferred-corporation) be
like the relationship between Fedora Project Linux, a cutting edge
and less stable version of Red Hat Enterprise Linux, a very solid and
corporate oriented linux distribution based on Fedora?
I haven't a sure answer yet, but Andrea Pescetti pointed me to these
Meeks messages:
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/2011-May/011424.html
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/2011-April/011153.html
and to the extremely important "Breathing Master" discussion here:
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/2011-May/thread.html
Those comments and discussions + yours + the relatively scarce news I
know about the LibO/TDF new business model based on paid
certification for support corporation, let me think that a Community
Libo "cutting edge" product is here to stay and may be a part of that
business model.
Well, *if* it's so, I'm simply not happy of such solution. It creates
a viable open ecosystem around LibO, for sure, but undermines the
proverbial rock solid stability I always experienced in OOo.
Just my 2 eurocents, of course. ;-)
Regards,
Gianluca
I am no longer a programmer, but as a former business programmer:
Make ALL functions work as advertised!
I had to make every option work properly and "exactly" like it was
wanted, or I get "bad news" from my bosses.
I even had to do such exact validation of input, I had to figure out
every possible value that would be used as input for the entered
fields. That is easy for things like date and time but not so easy
with number values. But I was expected to have it completely working
the first time it is use and every time it is used.
So we need to have a very stable package, and then need to have a
cutting edge package off that, for those users who want to choose.
The issues with Impress that have been reported in the lists make me
wonder about what is in the package that makes it work sometimes and
not on others. Those type of on/off issues are hard to predict and
test for. I know that there are people out there scratching their
heads trying to figure out what is the problem area of the code that
need to be fixed. But it will be fixed in due course.
I have not tried RC2, but I am told there are a lot of fixes and new
stuff in that version. As a "cutting edge" product, we keep adding
new and better features the product. As a "stable" product, people
keep fixing the issues till everything that can be fixed is fixed
"before" the new options are added. Most business models, that do not
deal with money or critical data, tend to be somewhere in the middle
between those two product development "styles".
As an Open Source software package, any business development team can
do their own work to fix issues that come up with their use of the
package. What I would like to see is a dialog between those business
people and the people who are working on LibreOffice for TDF/LO. This
would need to be a two way dialog that lets TDF know what issues are
out there and what they have done [or want done], and then have TDF
people respond about what is being done on their end. That way if
there is a fix already made, the business people could get the revised
code or maybe a compiled package with those issues fixed.
TDF/LO needs to be a part of the process so no matter how fixes the
code, all users will benefit from those fixes. Also, with the
constructive dialog between business development teams and TDF/LO
development teams, it would be better in the long run for keeping good
opinions about LibreOffice by the corporate/ business users.
We have been a business user of open source software and especially
OOO,
LO from way back before it was open sourced. Possibly there is a
difference in expectations. Managing use of products such as LO is
different from commercial software. With commercial software you pay
the
vendor to manage your updates, you rely on check for new software -
update. With LO and other open source software it is the responsibility
of the IT manager to decide which snapshot of the rapidly changing and
improving software to implement in their business.
We use a mix of Suse linux and Windows, Suse seem relatively
reserved
in their updating and their package management tends to produce fairly
stable results, not leading edge. I also stay a couple of versions
behind so I can research potential advantages/disadvantages before
updating. For business I would use package and update management of LO
from Suse to ease my job. For most recent home use where I can tolerate
some more faults I might use the installations from the LO site for the
most recent advances and to test benefits against cost of updating. So
as a business user I would expect to pay a little more for the managed
packages and receive a little more, and am quite happy with what I
receive.
I believe the branded versions of LO are advantageous to the
advancement
of LO, adding credibility and stability. I think the Fedora, Suse,
Ubuntus a doing a valuable service to LO. The difficulty comes with the
Windows users of LO. There doesn't seem to be a commercial enterprise
championing a windows version of LO and so the windows users need to
asses each community release of LO as to its being fit for their
purposes. For businesses that comes down to the IT manager checking
each
release, monitoring bug reporting, trying the release, before
rolling it
out. This is my approach for our Windows PC's not using Suse.
I recollect the saying "free as in beer or free as in speech" A beer
you
didn't pay for was not free, it cost something to make and someone else
paid for it.
steve