What is wrong in using a new powerful tool that gives many more facilities compared to the old tool?
Of course, I am not suggesting that users should be forced to use a tool that does not fit their
Why don't we try out a small pilot project and get the early user feedback, and see what happens? :)
A major factor in favor of trying new technologies is, we don't have old legacy data; so there are
no worries about losing data because of non-compatibility.
Note that LibO itself has a major paradigm shift vis-a-vis OOo:
1. It will have a new design paradigm (feature vs content)
2. it will have new interfaces
So why is it that we want a paradigm shift in LibO design; but not for the help community?
A case in point is this thread itself.
It started when I wanted to know if Drupal is going to be adopted.
I never got my answer.
But we have since then covered a lot of other inter-related ideas.
Now a mail chain is the least efficient tool for such conceptual discussion.
* We cannot reach any conclusion.
* A latecomer cannot read it and understand what is happening.
A concept map (or an argument map) are the best tool for conceptual discussion.
Both can be collaboratively plotted in Drupal.
People can argue for and against any idea, and it actually reaches a conclusion.
It is used by NASA for taking mission-critical decisions.
So why should we still use mail lists for the same purpose?
Just because we have that old habit?
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to email@example.com
List archive: http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Impressum (Legal Info)
: 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