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

Hi Charles,

Thanks for the info on a different feedback system generating a
different view of the topic. That was very useful, and I think should
have been mentioned *much* earlier.

It is likely the the people who mostly come to this list are the ones
with problems, so we are likely to see a higher incidence of people
wanting the more stable branch.

While that may negate my opinion that the primary download should be
switched from the less stable branch to the more stable branch, I still
feel that the best approach would be to offer both as equal choices,
with clear explanations.

Or perhaps even to do away with the one branch completely, and
concentrate more on a single branch, if the difference in stability is
so negligible, as you keep suggesting. However, I feel that the
difference is probably big enough to warrant keeping both branches, and
therefore big enough to warrant having two *equal* download choices,
*with* explanations.

But thank you for contributing this constructive information that has
helped this discussion move forward.


On Thu, 07 Aug 2014 15:07:47 +0200
"Charles-H. Schulz" <> wrote:

Le 07.08.2014 14:50, Paul a écrit :
On Thu, 07 Aug 2014 09:59:46 +0200
"Charles-H. Schulz" <> wrote:

Le 07.08.2014 09:54, Tom Davies a écrit :
Hi :)
(to James's suggestion.)
I think most people on this mailing list would probably agree
with getting
the 4.2.6.

That is your own wild call and your own opinion. I don't agree with
you. Many people don't agree with you. Stop saying somebody should
get the version you like.

Again, with all due respect Charles, but I have heard many people on
this list echo that sentiment. It seems to me like every time this
question comes up there are far more people recommending going for
the more stable branch than there are recommending going for the
less stable
branch, if there are even any of those.

Tom's suggestion is far from a wild call, although you are of course
free to disagree with it.

It is a wild call not because it is unreasonable (it isn't) but
because it is peremptory.
Yes, we can read here, on this list, that the newer branch is a
problem. We have read it since several years but I'd like to point
out two rather different elements.
- the same people complain about the same things for years, right
here. For instance Tom has always said here and elsewhere he was not 
understanding the reason of two branches. Noop has always complained 
about the two branches and the release pace. It does not make their 
opinion invalid, but I'm suggesting a pattern here.
- This list is interesting, because it is one type of location. As it 
happens, my main contributions these past months to the project have 
been creating and sharing content on social media on behalf of 
LibreOffice and TDF (yes I'm the main guy behind the daily tweets).
You would not believe how different the feedback is. True, people
report bugs just like with anything else, but 90% of the time, the
people on the social media are users who keep asking for new features
and want more and more of them. There was to my knowledge, since
January 2014 exactly two people who wrote that they experienced a bug
(with the newer branch) and were switching back to the older one. And
we get feedback everyday from several different people, so that could
give you an idea of the volume we're dealing here with.

What am I trying to show here?

Certainly not that people on social media are "more right" than
people here. But that the opinions diverge with demographics, the
place, the crowds, the kind of usage, etc. Indeed here, everytime
this question arises, the same people will repeat the same arguments.
It does not make their opinions unfair or inaccurate; but an echo
chamber is also very easy to form on the Internet, esp. on a mailing
list. Last but not least, positive feedback is rare compared to
negative - here, in FOSS or in any customer service. I'd be shocked
it we experienced the opposite :-)




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.