Re: [libreoffice-website] Download page: Make the 'stable' version more prominent?

On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 11:44 PM, Charles-H. Schulz
<charles.schulz@documentfoundation.org> wrote:
> I strongly advocate against it; it would only create more confusion and
> continue into the storyline that fresh=unstable and stable=good.

Hmm.. perhaps the word "stable" is problematic in this situation. If
we call the branch with less churn 'stable,' that does imply something
about the stability of other branches that are under more active
development.

> No one puts an older software branch in front of the more recent branch.
> Does MS Office advertise MS Office 2010? :-)

Good point, although I think our situation might be a bit different. Consider:

* We push updates to the LO 'stable' branch. Does Microsoft push the
same kinds of updates to Office 2010?

* (I believe) we recommend our 'stable' branch for enterprise
deployment. Does Microsoft recommend Office 2010 for enterprise
deployment?

In some ways this might just boil down to the question of: "What's our
use case for the 'stable' branch?"

Cheers,
--R

-- 
Robinson Tryon
LibreOffice Community Outreach Herald
Senior QA Bug Wrangler
The Document Foundation
qubit@libreoffice.org

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: website+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/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted