Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2016 Archives by date, by thread · List index

Hi :)
errr, at least wrt 3.5 - i'm not sure about trolls.

I think as a general rule the later versions of a branch tend to be
more reliable in terms of their functionality and probably more stable
too (although i've never had LO out-right crash or anything).  So for
the 3.5 branch the 3.5.4 was probably more stable and reliable than
the 3.5.0.  With the 4.2 branch hopefully it's become smoother and
more reliable with each "Service Pack", such that 4.2.1 was a bit
better, 4.2.2 quite a bit better, 4.2.3 even better and with the 4.2.5
being nearly the best.  The best version in the 4.2 branch 'should be'
the 4.2.6 but sometimes branches don't bother to go that far because
the x.x.5 was plenty "good enough" (or other reasons for moving onto a
newer branch).

The advantage with newer branches 'should be' that they just have
better functionality, greater compatibility with the ever-changing MS
formats.  Although they are initially "stable" (using the devs
definition of the word - errr and extra-ordinarily so, especially when
compared to pretty much any other software apparently) some older
functionality may have temporarily been inadvertently broken.
Hopefully the "code clean-up" has significantly reduced the amount of
unexpected breakages of completely unrelated things.

So the 4.3.6 should be about as stable and reliable as the 4.2.6 and
the 4.4.6.  There is not much point in trying out the earlier releases
of any branch, just skip straight to the one with the highest 3rd

However what 'should be' and "what really is" are often completely
opposite from each other in so many areas of life.  So i would be
fairly interested in Nasrin's opinions about how closely the last few
branches seem to have followed that "general rule", especially "with
regards to" ( = wrt ) "accessibility issues" such as screen-readers.

There is a separate mailing list for accessibility issues but it's so
inactive that i doubt anyone is still on it and it may have even been
closed down a few years ago without me noticing it being stopped.  I
suspect that a lot of people moved to Apache Open Office when IBM
donated it's fork of OO.o to AOO.  OpenOffice is such a close relative
of LibreOffice nowadays that it doesn't make a huge difference which
is being used imo.

I think the main thing creating a problem for "what should be" is Java
and Base.  If they can be avoided then maybe the "general rule" is
fairly valid.  With either Base or Java being used then it becomes a
lot less clear, unless things have changed radically in the last
couple of years.

Regards from
Tom :)

On 20 January 2016 at 12:51, Andreas Säger <> wrote:
Am 20.01.2016 um 13:36 schrieb Andreas Säger:

I used 3.5 for many years with no problems.

Oh, shit. Did I feed a troll?

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.