Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2014 Archives by date, by thread · List index

I don't know the cars in question, so maybe that specific case is
different. But in my general experience, when two car models are sold,
the only reason the older one is still sold is because they have unsold
vehicles that they need to get rid of, so they offer them at a lower
price, and the only reason to get an older model is because it is
cheaper. There is *no* other reason, unless parts are different, in
which case the older model's parts are usually cheaper as well,
although sometimes the reverse is true. The older one is in no way
safer, usually the reverse.

In the case of Office 2011 vs. 2013, again, I haven't bought Office for
so long I don't know the specifics, but I would be very surprised if
price wasn't the only reason the older software was still sold. In most
cases where a new version like that is brought out, the older version
is due to be retired pretty soon. Unless there is a specific feature or
compatability issue, in which case it is (or should be) clearly stated
to potential buyers.


On Wed, 06 Aug 2014 12:16:53 +0200
"Charles-H. Schulz" <> wrote:

Hello Tom,

First, both Nino and Sophie's answers are really good. Mine was just 
trying to be simple and short.
I think, just like Sophie suggested, that you are still thinking
along the "stable-unstable" pattern.

My answer, by the way, does not contraddict Nino or Sophie. Let me
take two -already used- examples to show you there is no

MS Office 2011 and MS Office 2013. Both are stable. Both are still up 
for sale. What's the real difference? More features in MS Office
2013, sure. But both are stable. However 2011 gets more patches, is
more tested than Office 2013 (in this case users both pay and get to
be "guinea pigs").

Second example: Chevrolet Impala 2013 and 2011. What's the
difference? Well, there are a few cosmetic changes, perhaps one or
two equipment that changed; maybe a few more liveries available, but
there's also been a set of optimized industrial manufacturing
processes that have been improved between 2012 and 2013. Note: both
are "stable", aka. fit to have millions of people driving these cars.
Are these drivers guinea-pigs? Yes in a sense. I challenge you to
find any sort of distribution process of manufactured good, service,
software, where uers or customers are not guinea pigs in one way or
another; Free Software is just really transparent and honest about
it, because after all, you're not paying for anything when using it.

Hope this helped,


Le 06.08.2014 11:38, Tom Davies a écrit :
Hi :)
This seems to contradict what both Charles and what Florian
Reisinger were

It does seem to make more sense though.  It kinda explains why
people might
prefer one branch or the other one, which was very unclear from
Charles and
Florian's posts.

It also kinda explains the graphic on the;
page, although that graphic doesn't make a lot of sense to me.  Do 
people understand it?  There used to be a neat little graph which
kinda boggled the eyes at first but began to make sense after
staring at it for a

The bit about "master branch" was a bit beyond me but suggested an 
to the older thread about how bug-fixes added to the older branch 
manage to
get into the newer branch.  Still i am sure i am not the only one 
by such a thing.

So Nino's answer suggests that some people might prefer the branch
that has
matured because by that time it is more stable.  So releases with a 
3rd digit are more mature, more stable and less likely to have 
The only downside is that you get less features.

Then it also makes sense that people would often prefer to use the 
less mature branch even though it hasn't had as many bug-fixes
added to it.

However this seems to contradict what Charles was saying about both
branches being fully stable.  So which is wrong?
Regards from
Tom :)

On 6 August 2014 09:42, Nino Novak <> wrote:

Am 06.08.2014 07:29, schrieb Pikov Andropov:
Florian Reisinger wrote on 8/6/2014 1:22 AM:
The problem we have: We do not have one release branch as
Firefox has,
we have two... Users should use and find bugs on the "Fresh"
version in
order to make thee fresh, which will be renamed to stable after 6M.
So how to say "you can use the feature packed fresh"? It is not
an RC
it is an tested final release....
So yes, we have a different model, so we need different names
then the
standard :)

What are the differences between the two branches?

The younger one (fresh) has been forked later from the master 
branch. Therefore it obviously has more features.

But as it is younger, it is less "mature" than the earlier (still) 

If you look into each branch separately, the branch goes through
the well
known states (alpha, beta, RC, final) for its first release (the 
then keeps iterating through several additional (bugfix) releases, 
x.y.1 to x.y.6 in most cases. So each branch individually gains
bugfreeness during its individual


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

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.