It is of my opinion that you should stick with the standards.
What is wrong with calling the newest possible stable version "Release
Candidate", the proven stable version "Stable", the unstable beta-tester
It makes absolutely no sense to me to be different just for the sake of
being different. Is not Libre Office already different? Yes, it is a fork
from OpenOffice.org, but you are still different.
Stick with the standards. This "fresh" and "still" horse hoowhee is just
that, a big pile of horse hoowhee.
As NoOp said, most of you open source developers already make the download
page confusing enough without confusing it even further with the horse
Just stick with what almost everyone already knows. Quit trying to be new
and gritty. It just shows me your stupidity instead of your intelligence.
View this message in context:
Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
To unsubscribe e-mail to: email@example.com
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
Impressum (Legal Info)
: 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