Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Releases

On 07/27/2017 11:19 AM, V Stuart Foote wrote:
> krackedpress wrote
> > ...
> >
> > It would be nice to have the "still" description and link above that of
> > the "fresh" download and description.  That way, the "suitable for all
> > users" version is the first choice and the "recommended for technology
> > enthusiasts" listing would be second.  To me, that indicates the fact
> > that we feel it is "more important" to keep a version that all users can
> > use - from individuals to enterprises - and not stress the "enthusiasts"
> > version.  For me, I feel that the way it is shows LO/TDF is not for
> > businesses since you eye gravitates to the big boxed "tester version"
> > and you could almost overlook the link for the "business version link".
> >
> > If we really want to promote LibreOffice as a office suite for
> > professionals, we need to have is shown first in the download page -
> > before any other version.  Maybe in the drop down menu, on the startup
> > page, could say "Business Version - Still" and then "Technology
> > Enthusiasts version - Fresh".  That will easily show the visitors which
> > version is for them.
> That is a topic for the marketing folks, but I am comfortable saying no one
> on the ESC sees it that way.

Yes, I do not see that, mostly, but I had a person using the latest and 
older versions of MS Office [bought older one around 2013] and he looked 
at the download page and saw the current page.  He is a person who uses 
tablets for home and business [in large office, and a home office].

He did not like the fact he had to use an "very small" and "undefined" 
link to download the software for his home [family and home office] 
laptop and old family desktop.

He thought LO was "not professional enough" to use.  No matter how I 
vouch for LO, he was turned off by the download page.

He had to buy 3 MS Office CD/DVDs to get all three systems that he and 
his family uses.

With the current Format>Page dialog pop-up delay, I will not promote the 
5.3.x versions when it becomes the "still" version.  The current 5.3.x 
still has that issue for my 4 computers [Ubuntu Linux and Windows 10].  
I was told it was a know "bug".  I has to go back to the latest 5.2.7 
version for both OSs.  Hopefully it will be fixed soon.


> For project health we need more users on the Fresh, or even the master
> branch. BZ is clogged with newly spun issues against branches already EOL,
> majority of them already fixed and stock QA triage response is going to be
> test with a current build. Project development simply moves on.

"Master Branch"?
This is the first time I heard of a master branch.  I know of "still", 
"fresh", and "developer's" versions, but not "master".

Yes, we need "fresh" users, but when it does not work property for the 
user then the fresh version needs to be removed.  I could not do my work 
with the last two 5.3.x fresh versions, due to the long delay for the 
formatting page options.  So I went back to 5.2.7.

Hopefully 5.3.6 or 5.3.7 will be working properly when 5.4.x line 
becomes the fresh one.

> Rather we don't get to stable status for builds without testing--testing
> requires use of the latest branch with patches pushed back as uncovered and
> where feasible.  For example OpenGL support, and HarfBuzz with DirectWrite
> based font rendering on Windows is really only just becoming stable at the
> 5.4.0 release--the 5.3 branch remains wonky depending on GPU/driver
> combinations.
I do not know much about the underline GPU/driver combination issues.  I 
just know what works and not works with Ubuntu 64-bit and Windows 10 
64-bit packages.  I no longer have any working 32-bit systems.

> Issues would likely have been uncovered sooner if more folks had made the
> effort to test against master in addition to Fresh builds. Installation in
> parallel is trivial, so for folks invested in the project it is a low
> threshold to contribute.
I switched to 5.3.x when it went beyond 5.3.2.  I just tend not to 
install .0 through .2 versions.
> --
> View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Releases-tp4219060p4219185.html
> Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscribe@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
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