Most stable version right now Fw: [libreoffice-users] stable vs new

Hi :)
I would only go with the 3.6.7 if you are currently on the 3.6.x branch and need to stay there or 
if you have need of staying with the accessibility java-bridge, older version for other programs.  


I think everyone else is better off with 4.0.4 and perhaps update in that branch as it steadily 
marches onwards.  

On the other hand i still have plenty of machines on 3.5.something and it's a free world so you can 
do as you please.  

Regards from 

Tom :)  





----- Forwarded Message -----
> From: Girvin R. Herr <girvin.herr@sbcglobal.net>
> To: Tom Davies <tomdavies04@yahoo.co.uk> 
> Cc: V Stuart Foote <VStuart.Foote@utsa.edu>; "users@global.libreoffice.org" 
> <users@global.libreoffice.org> 
> Sent: Sunday, 4 August 2013, 21:23
> Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] stable vs new
>
>
> Tom,
> To me:
> stability = productivity
> But I am just a lowly user.
>
> Nice description!  I saved it for future reference.
> Now I know why I keep getting 3.x update notices when 4.x has been 
> released some time ago.  That surprised, but pleased, me.  As a result 
> of your description, I will have to repackage and install 3.6.7 after my 
> monthly backup today.
> Girvin Herr
>
>
> On 08/04/2013 10:35 AM, Tom Davies wrote:
> > Hi :)
> > Yes, i was trying to keep it simple and practical by  avoiding side issues or detail.  Even so 
> > my post turned out to be a lot longer than planned!
> >
> > For some projects
> > stability = stagnation
> >
> > ie that the 3.0.0 could be considered stable because pretty much all the bugs are known issues 
> > and mostly written-up somewhere.  That has never been considered good enough in LO.  The earlier 
> > releases in a branch are not considered "more stable" after the branch reaches .3 or .4.  It's 
> > only the .3 or .4 and onwards that are considered more stable.
> >
> > Time-based releases vs "release when ready".  Whichever methodology is used it's only after 
> > initial proper release that the thing gets used on the mad set-ups out in the real world that 
> > most problems surface and get fixed.  With MS products many corporates wouldn't consider 
> > installing before Service Pack 1 got released, which means it's only after SP 1 that many  
> > problems come to light!  So, i agree with Stuart and most of the rest of the project on this 
> > issue.  I'm sure the arguments about which is best will continue for another 7 years  in most 
> > projects (and possibly longer).
> >
> > We all get to play ginea pig but we would with proprietary software too.  The difference is that 
> > if a problem we reported does get fixed we get the fix for free along with all the updates that 
> > we didn't help with.  There is no paying for upgrades or being pushed into buying a different 
> > bundle by some salesman.
> >
> > Regards from
> > Tom :)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: V Stuart Foote <VStuart.Foote@utsa.edu>
> > > To: "users@global.libreoffice.org" <users@global.libreoffice.org>
> > > Sent: Sunday, 4 August 2013, 16:58
> > > Subject: RE: [libreoffice-users] stable vs new
> > >
> > >
> > > Folks,
> > >
> > > In opening this thread ( Nabble  
> > > http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/stable-vs-new-tp4068750.html ) Tom is correct in a 
> > > practical sense.  Stability is an inherent component of a mature product. And testing during 
> > > the development cycles by more potential user willing to invest a little time in QA is 
> > > essential to the health of the project.
> > >
> > > But a key aspect Tom omits is that LibreOffice development and release stages are tightly 
> > > timed--and by proxy so is its support. Nor does he mention that the project has stayed on 
> > > schedule since inception--synchronizing to a six month minor release cycle implemented in a 
> > > broader ecosystem of Free and Open Source Software.
> > >
> > > The Release Plan for LibreOffice publishes the release schedule, current status and a 
> > > historical record of the project, worth a read:
> > >
> > > https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Release_Plan
> > >
> > > Keeping to the time based release plan means that the delay between initial release on a minor 
> > > version and the next minor version release is just six months.  And that the delay between the 
> > > x.x.0 release and each bug fix release has been and will continue to be  just one month.  So, 
> > > while I don't completely agree Toms' assessment of how far along each bug fix takes things--it 
> > > is just not the way the user feedback, QA,and development work proceeds--but it is not 
> > > unreasonable practical advise.
> > >
> > > Support has kept to the same cycle--for the most part--user documentation (static HTML or wiki 
> > > based, and published) can always use more active contributors and lags a bit as a result.
> > >
> > > This is not just development churn, there is solid User eXperience, QA and development work at 
> > > every tick of the release cycle. And as a minor release nears end of its development life it 
> > > gets less and less development attention--QA and development resources long since shifted to 
> > > new development and bug fixes.  Enhancements and bug fixes become more and more costly to push 
> > > backward with each tick in development cycle--so less likely to occur. In a sense that also is 
> > > stability, or maybe stagnation.
> > >
> > > The project is on sound footings as a time based release, that is not going to change so no 
> > > sense in debating it here. Rather, if you have specific questions or comments about its 
> > > implementation or how best to make use of software from time based release managed project  
> > > that would be a worthwhile discussion.
> > >
> > > Stuart
> > > a LibreOffice QA volunteer, focusing on accessibility issues.
> > >
> > > p.s.  For use Accessibility and Assistive Technology tools the use of a Java 7, Java Runtime 
> > > Environment and the Java Access Bridge v2.0.3 was not ported backward to the 3.6.x branch.  It 
> > > was included in the  4.1.0 release, and has been patched for the upcoming 4.0.5 release.  Users 
> > > of 3.6.x must continue to use a Java 6 JRE (e.g. 1.6u45) and  manual install of Java Access 
> > > Bridge v2.0.2.
>
>
> -- 
> To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscribe@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/users/
> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscribe@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/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted