Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2013 Archives by date, by thread · List index

Hi :)
It's not so much that i "wait for it".  I keep meaning to try out the
earlier releases releases in a branch, preferably beta pre-releases of
the x.x.0.  DOingf so and running through a few bug-reports to see if
they still happen in the newer version.  It's likely to help the devs
stabilise the branch earlier.   It might catch their attention at a
time when almost all eyes are on 1 version and maybe help them crack
long-running issues.  I just rarely get around to it and suddenly find
the stable release is already upon us.

It's on my colleagues machines that i really need to ensure that only
the most stable versions are installed and i usually skip a few
branches before bothering to upgrade theirs at all.
Regards from
Tom :)

On 17 December 2013 22:01, Girvin Herr <> wrote:
To add my 2-cents to this discussion, I align with Tom and the others who
wait for the x.x.4+ version.  In my case, does everything I need it
to do and does it without surprises. Therefore, I am not pressured to
upgrade to the 4.0 or 4.1 version. I, and others it would seem, are content
to wait for the most stable versions.  I have that luxury.  On the other
hand, others may need to upgrade to get new features they need or think they
need.  That may be why some install the latest and greatest not-quite-stable
versions in hopes that the bugs in them will not affect them. Sometimes it
works, sometimes it doesn't.
Girvin Herr

On 12/17/2013 02:17 AM, Tom Davies wrote:

Hi :)
It sounds like you are happier with much later releases in a branch.
It makes sense to wait for the x.x.5.  For a lot of people the x.x.4
is the best balance between new features and stability.  If you
normally use more than 1 machine then getting a x.x.0 on one and
keeping the other at the last stable one you were happy with makes a
lot of sense.  It's good to test-drive early releases and post
bug-reports against them but to have the stable one for normal use.
Regards from
Tom :)

On 17 December 2013 09:57, rost52 <> wrote:

Thanks for the hint with 4.0.6. This version is indeed very stable and it
has a least one feature which I missed in previous version. Thus I
very happy with 4.0.6.

I used 4.0.5 before, changed to and then back to 4.0.6. Maybe Tom
write and something happend during the download/installation of
thus this version showed a few bugs of which one I could not accept.

Currently I am thinking about installing 4.1.4 but maybe I don't have
for installation and then 4.1.5 will be released.....

On 2013-12-17 05:47, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote:

If you want to try 4.0.6 first, since you jumped from 3.6.x, it might be
good idea.  It is at the end on that line and I use it all of the time.

Sure, you can try 4.1.4 when it comes out, but 4.0.6 is very stable and
you can use it as a stepping stone to the 4.1.x line. The "messages"
4.1.3 being too "buggy" for you [or others] suggests going to 4.0.6 and
going back down to the 3.6.x line.  Later, when all of the "possible
problems" with 4.1.4 comes in, you can decide if it is ready for you to

Still, personally, I would try 4.0.6, for now.  Then look into 4.1.4 or
4.1.5 later.

On 12/16/2013 06:47 AM, Dr. R. O. Stapf - the service institute japan

Hi Tom,Thanks for the hint, I will do with the 4.1.4 version which is
        scheduled to be released this week.RPresidentthe service
japan... the service enhancement
On 2013-12-14 00:46, Tom Davies wrote:
Hi :)
Ahh, i think just go for a standard normal reinstall of 4.1.3. maybe
re-download the installer to make sure that isn't the problem
Regards from
Tom :)

On 13 December 2013 02:42, rost52bugquestcontri@online.dewrote:The fact
that I had to downgrade from to 4.0.6 due to bugs and
Nino's proposal to install 2 versions parallel made my thinking that it
would be very efficient to have the install wiazerd modify to use it to
replace a version or install it parallel to an existing one.

I am just hesitant to go trough the work of installing LibO through the
command line.

In my case I would install 4.0.6 (stable) and (with some nasty
for me but some interesting features as well). With 2 versions I also
do easy testing for bug reports.

Is there interest/support for having the installed wizard modified to
parallel installations?

On 2013-12-12 23:07, Nino Novak wrote:Am 12.12.2013 09:38, schrieb
Shivpal Singh:What would happen if I download LO 3.5.7 (already started
from Source
Forge. Will there be a clash between the 2 versions? Will LO
allow me to install the older version LO 3.5.7?Kunwar, if it is of
interest for you: you can install both versions in
parallel -
To unsubscribe e-mail

guidelines + more:
archive: messages
to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be

To unsubscribe e-mail to:
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be

To unsubscribe e-mail to:
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be

To unsubscribe e-mail to:
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


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.