[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LibreOffice Still?


Hi :)
No-Op has been a huge help to many people on this User Mailing List since
the very early days of TDF. I know that user-support and customer service
are kinda frowned on as being not much work.

However it is the first point-of-contact between weeus and is a prime place
to build people up and recruit them for this and other teams. I bet there
are tons of people in various teams right now who wouldn't be there if it
hadn't been for No-Op inspiring and pushing them into it.

Instead of grumbling about how little work No-Op is doing how about doing
more work yourself to answer the unanswered questions here. Maybe that way
you could show us how little work it takes and we would learn to be
better. Or maybe, just maybe you'd find out how much hard work it takes.


The old web-page No-Op linked to was finally neat and tidy. Almost
elegant! It was finally easy to see how to change anything such as
language, OS, version. It was even quite a good way of showing off quite
what variety LO offers but done in way that wasn't confusing or hidden. At
last the buttons were proper buttons that could be pressed like real-world
buttons.

In chess games there is sometimes a dangerous moment when your position is
so perfect that any move is going to detract from that perfection. There
are times when you really need to pass and miss a go or lose the game.
That appears to have happened to the downloads page.

I was shocked by the downloads page today. The layout IS appalling and
confusing. It's difficult to find how to get anything other than the
default download. Then set choices kept getting forgotten. Tick-boxes
used inappropriately and didn't work.

Change just for the sake of change is not always positive.
Regards from
Tom :)




On 7 August 2014 09:09, Charles-H. Schulz <
charles.schulz@documentfoundation.org> wrote:

> Le 07.08.2014 09:55, NoOp a écrit :
>
> On 08/06/2014 10:01 AM, Florian Reisinger wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Tom,
>>>
>>> If we do not find the bugs in the fresh version, they won't be resolved
>>> until the rename to Stable/Still. If less use Fresh, the quality of the
>>> next stable will be lower.... Does this help?
>>>
>>
>> No. Basically what you and Sophie are saying is that 'we fully expect
>> new/any user to download and use the "Fresh" branch by default so that
>> LO (dev?) can find an resolve bugs in the 'new & improved & added
>> feature' version'. That's just crazy talk.
>>
>
> No, that is how Free Software works. If you think it is crazy, then
> Ubuntu, Firefox, the Linux kernel, Debian, Fedora, Mint, VLC... every other
> project has that crazy way.
>
>
>
>> I am somewhat astounded as I hear Charles complaining about funding
>> (rightly so, that's his job),
>>
>
>
> huh? What is my job, according to you?
>
>
>
> users complaining about lack of bug fixes
>> w/dev's LO countering with 'we only have a certain amount of resources &
>> have to prioritise' etc., etc. So why even have two branches to begin
>> with?
>>
>
>
> Because branches do not cost more money than 10 or 1.
>
>
>
>> The Fresh/Still nonsense is just that - nonsense. Here is a link to the
>> internet archive from LO Download in 2013 Dec 31:
>> <https://web.archive.org/web/20131231021742/http://www.
>> libreoffice.org/download>
>>
>> On that page there is no "Fresh", "Stable", "Still" et al; there is only
>> download defaulting to 4.1.4. and minor link options to change to 4.0 or
>> 'Pre-releases' 4.2. That download page makes complete sense. Why on
>> earth the "private marketing list" change to the current nonsense?
>>
>> @TDF: Please just stop. Go back to the download page of December 2013 &
>> keep it simple.
>>
>
>
> @Noop: please stop complaining about changes. In 2010, you were already
> complaining about the same things.
>
>
> IMO you should just drop the "Still" branch and concentrate your dev
>> efforts on one *single* user release. The next time that I (as a user)
>> hear that you've not enough resources to address a bug report I'll have
>> to ask: so, how many devs are working on 'Fresh' v 'Still' v 'Daily' v
>> 'Trunk' v EOL, etc? Can you not fix the bug because these folks are
>> spread so thin across the various "branches" that they can't properly
>> concentrate on a baseline release fix?
>>
>> @Sophie/Florian: The admission that 'Fresh' is the default so that bugs
>> will be identified earlier is, IMO, nuts (other words come to mind, but
>> I'll try to keep this civilized). 'Hello World - take our RC (X.Y.0) and
>> use it by default so that we can debug it' is not a good thing to
>> announce/promote here or elsewhere.
>>
>> @Charles: you keep asking for users on in this thread to suggest a new
>> name ("Now: if you have ideas for new names, etc. you are welcome to
>> contribute to our marketing team.) - no name is necessary, nor should it
>> be necessary for users on this list to need to subscribe to the
>> marketing list to voice their concerns. You are TDF - instead invite the
>> "private marketing list" members to participate in this thread, this is
>> afterall a user & user support concern. BTW: for those that may want to
>> do this anyway, just how does one gain access to this "private marketing
>> list" that Sophie spoke of? How about providing a link to a transcript
>> of the "private marketing list" contents so that others on this "open
>> source" project can review?
>>
>
>
> Do you think TDF is a company? TDF relies on volunteers. Our users are our
> future contributors. We are not Wal Mart. You don't buy things from us and
> users are not customers. So yes, even if it sounds crazy to you, we do
> highly encourage users to join our various teams. As for the private
> marketing list, yes we do use this list mostly for press/announcement
> preparations, otherwise news and text elements would be disclosed before
> due date. How do you join this list? Good question. By contributing, not by
> complaining, and by asking. And if that's not your call, we have plenty of
> other teams for you to join : https://www.libreoffice.org/
> community/get-involved/
>
> If that's still not your call, and you just want to use LibreOffice...
> that's fine! we are happy that you do so.
>
>
>
>> Bottom line is that I (and others) disagree with the "private marketing
>> list" decision to go with the existing 'Fresh/Still/whatever' download
>> page(s). Please consider simply rolling back to the Dec 2013 model.
>>
>
> Thank you for your suggestion, but no, we won't. We have deployed a brand
> new website, asked for feedback on several completely open and public lists
> for several months. We feel good about the choices we have made (although
> we are still toying with the Still branch name) but no we won't come back
> to the December 2013, December 2010 or December 10 C.E. because some think
> the past is always better than the future.
>
> Best,
>
> Charles.
>
>
>
> --
> 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
>

--
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

Follow-Ups:
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LibreOffice Still?"Charles-H. Schulz" <charles.schulz@documentfoundation.org>
References:
[libreoffice-users] LibreOffice Still?NoOp <glgxg@sbcglobal.net>
[libreoffice-users] Re: LibreOffice Still?arakish <rmfrunyan@gmail.com>
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LibreOffice Still?"\"J. Van Brimmer\"" <jerry.vb@gmail.com>
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LibreOffice Still?Florian Reisinger <florei@libreoffice.org>
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LibreOffice Still?Tom Davies <tomcecf@gmail.com>
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LibreOffice Still?Florian Reisinger <florei@libreoffice.org>
[libreoffice-users] Re: LibreOffice Still?NoOp <glgxg@sbcglobal.net>
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LibreOffice Still?"Charles-H. Schulz" <charles.schulz@documentfoundation.org>
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.