LibreOffice Still?

users
#1

While we're on 'nitpicking'...

OK I give... the download page/link is confusing enough with the
'Download' link going directly to
<http://www.libreoffice.org/download/libreoffice-fresh/> 'LibreOffice
Fresh', but now I see that 'LibreOffice Stable' has changed to
'LibreOffice Still' <http://www.libreoffice.org/download/libreoffice-still/>
what the heck is this all about? What next, LO Stale?

list: what version and OS are you using?
user: still have Windows 8 installed
list: you have what still installed?
user: still Windows
list: still Windows what?
user: still Windows 8
list: have you tried fresh?
user: say what?
list: try fresh
user: I still don't understand
list: install fresh
user: OK I did a fresh install, but still doesn't work

#2

The problem is that it is difficult to find a word that explains that one
version is new (with new features/bugs/regressions) and the other one has
been patched so that new features are already stable.

If you call Stable to the patched branch (and calling it Patched doesn't
sound very nice either) seems to imply that the other branch (now called
Fresh) isn't stable in the sense that it will crash and be unusable...

There was a proposal to call the (previously named Stable and now named
Still) branch as Mature. But since that word is currently associated with
some sexual preference/deviation, it was dropped in favor of Still.

It is easy to criticize and find problems, but it is more difficult to find
a nice word that everyone accepts...

Do you have a better suggestion?

(For the record, I'm not a member of TDF or work for it and had no
contribution to this decision)

#3

Hi :slight_smile:
It seems important to avoid terms that are familiar and in common usage in
other projects. However maybe in the search for a better term we might
find something that other projects would also find preferable.

As a gateway application we often have to find answers to issues that other
OpenSource projects have never needed to think about. It might be
interesting to see what is done by other gateway apps (such as Firefox,
Chrome, Gimp) or gateway distros such as Ubuntu, Mageia, openSuSE and
others have done.

Doubtless such discussion is more effective on the "Discussion mailing
list". On this mailing list we just have to go along with whatever has
been decided, or to use our own words to make it clearer what is meant.
Personally i quite like "Fresh" or SliTaz's "Cooking" but i also think we
have not yet found anything to beat "stable" even though it's likely to
cause misconceptions.
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#4

The problem is that it is difficult to find a word that explains that one
version is new (with new features/bugs/regressions) and the other one has
been patched so that new features are already stable.

If you call Stable to the patched branch (and calling it Patched doesn't
sound very nice either) seems to imply that the other branch (now called
Fresh) isn't stable in the sense that it will crash and be unusable...

There was a proposal to call the (previously named Stable and now named
Still) branch as Mature. But since that word is currently associated with
some sexual preference/deviation, it was dropped in favor of Still.

I search the discuss list to see if I could find where this proposal
took place, but failed to find anything. The only relevent post I found
was the one you made in 2012:
<http://go.mail-archive.com/UAlqVfatDP8YuwrKaNaUGa3nEbo=>
(Which version to get?)
So if you can kindly point me to the correct list to view the proposal &
discussion I'd be grateful.

BTW: the download page is showing:

Available Versions

LibreOffice is available in the following released versions:

    4.1.6
    4.2.5
    4.3.0

And of course, 4.1.6 is EOL:
<https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleasePlan#4.1_release>

So perhaps <https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=54408>
(Obsolete DOWNLOAD recommendations 3.5.5 and 3.6.0) should be always
open and changed to Obsolete DOWNLOAD recommendations).

It is easy to criticize and find problems, but it is more difficult to find
a nice word that everyone accepts...

Perhaps even more so when there are monthly point releases and 6 month
major release cycles.

Do you have a better suggestion?

Yes. Keep 'Stable' for the moment, or return to 'Recommended' for 4.2
and point out why on the download page as before. 4.3 is by definition
for 'Early Adopters'
<https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/File:LibOReleaseLifecycle.png> and
should not IMO be the default on the download button.

(For the record, I'm not a member of TDF or work for it and had no
contribution to this decision)

:slight_smile:

#5

...

Doubtless such discussion is more effective on the "Discussion mailing
list". On this mailing list we just have to go along with whatever has
been decided, or to use our own words to make it clearer what is meant.

Actually it is pertinent to *this* mailing list as this is where support
(or facsimile thereof) lives. New users come to this list daily and if
the download page and version names keep changing, assisting users on
this list becomes increasingly more difficult.

#6

Pedro wrote

The problem is that it is difficult to find a word that explains that one
version is new (with new features/bugs/regressions) and the other one has
been patched so that new features are already stable.

Is this some sort of l10n/i18n issue? I ask because this problem has been
solved for many other projects and for a great many years. The process is
Development > Test > Production and these terms are widely respected and
understood. Debian uses the variation "unstable", "testing", "stable", and
"oldstable". I think a term like "production" should be considered for the
more mature series. I agree with NoOp on this issue. The current name
choices add nothing of value or clarity.

Best wishes, Owen.

#7

Hi all,

The problem is that it is difficult to find a word that explains that one
version is new (with new features/bugs/regressions) and the other one has
been patched so that new features are already stable.

If you call Stable to the patched branch (and calling it Patched doesn't
sound very nice either) seems to imply that the other branch (now called
Fresh) isn't stable in the sense that it will crash and be unusable...

There was a proposal to call the (previously named Stable and now named
Still) branch as Mature. But since that word is currently associated with
some sexual preference/deviation, it was dropped in favor of Still.

I search the discuss list to see if I could find where this proposal
took place, but failed to find anything. The only relevent post I found
was the one you made in 2012:
<http://go.mail-archive.com/UAlqVfatDP8YuwrKaNaUGa3nEbo=>
(Which version to get?)
So if you can kindly point me to the correct list to view the proposal &
discussion I'd be grateful.

The discussion happened on the private marketing list. This list is not
secret but kept private because this is where PR are prepared and are
under embargo until the release, however translators need to have them
earlier.
Charles explains the choice that was made in his blog here
http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2014/08/01/libreoffice-4-3/
If you want to give your feedback and make other proposals, please make
them on the marketing list to reach the marketing team.

Kind regards
Sophie

#8

Hi :slight_smile:
It is really difficult to choose a name.

"Production" is also not in common usage and might confuse people. It
kinda implies factory-work or suggests that it might be something to do
with coding to create LibreOffice. I've seen it used in a few geeky places
but "normal users" (if such persons exists) are unlikely to have heard it.

"Still", to me, suggests stagnant, not going anywhere or stuck. An example
might be "Blimey you are still stuck on this ancient pos?"

"Still" is a bit like the idea behind the SliTaz naming but they use
"Stable" too alongside their "Cooking" branch. Perhaps we could use
"Simmering" as in "barely palpable simmering rage" or "In the UK public
disorder simmered just under the surface throughout the eighties
occasionally boiling over in demonstrations, strikes and riots".

I'm sure most parents are familiar with the difficulty of choosing a
suitable name! Did anyone else go out and seek suggestions from other
people and run through previous suggestions? Then finding that names they
had thought were great had suddenly turned very sour? "The Doctor" in Star
Trek Voyager never does manage to settle on a name for himself but helps
choose a good name for Naomi.

Sorry NoOp! I had assumed the name choosing would have been done
publicly!
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#9

I have to agree with NoOp on this.

I've ended up being quite confused on some things whose definition was only
available to the "high priesthood" who use forums that I would never
normally be interested in (marketing certainly being one of them).

#10

It is of my opinion that you should stick with the standards.

What is wrong with calling the newest possible stable version "Release
Candidate", the proven stable version "Stable", the unstable beta-tester
version "Beta"?

It makes absolutely no sense to me to be different just for the sake of
being different. Is not Libre Office already different? Yes, it is a fork
from OpenOffice.org, but you are still different.

Stick with the standards. This "fresh" and "still" horse hoowhee is just
that, a big pile of horse hoowhee.

As NoOp said, most of you open source developers already make the download
page confusing enough without confusing it even further with the horse
hoowhee.

Just stick with what almost everyone already knows. Quit trying to be new
and gritty. It just shows me your stupidity instead of your intelligence.

rmfr

#11

+1

#12

Hi,
The problem we have: We do not have one release branch as Firefox has, we have two... Users should use and find bugs on the "Fresh" version in order to make thee fresh, which will be renamed to stable after 6M.
So how to say "you can use the feature packed fresh"? It is not an RC it is an tested final release....
So yes, we have a different model, so we need different names then the standard :slight_smile:

#13

Thoroughly agree!
+1

jdh

#14

What are the differences between the two branches?

#15

Hello Pikov

Hi,
The problem we have: We do not have one release branch as Firefox

has, we have two... Users should use and find bugs on the "Fresh"
version in order to make thee fresh, which will be renamed to stable
after 6M.

So how to say "you can use the feature packed fresh"? It is not an RC

it is an tested final release....

So yes, we have a different model, so we need different names then

the standard :slight_smile:

What are the differences between the two branches?

basically one has more features than the others. They are both stable (hence the change of name) but are in a different state and started at a different date. It is very much like MS Office 2011 and 2013 or a car model with a different serie each year.

You can get the abridged and detailed list of features and bug fixes for each version by reading the release notes.

Cheers,

Charles.

#16

The younger one (fresh) has been forked later from the master development
branch. Therefore it obviously has more features.

But as it is younger, it is less "mature" than the earlier (still) branch.

If you look into each branch separately, the branch goes through the well
known states (alpha, beta, RC, final) for its first release (the x.y.0), but
then keeps iterating through several additional (bugfix) releases, from
x.y.1 to x.y.6 in most cases. So each branch individually gains increasingly
bugfreeness during its individual

Nino

#17

Hi :slight_smile:
Ahh, so both branches are just as stable as each other? The only
difference is that the newer branch has more features?

So why do we still have the older branch at all?
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#18

Hi :slight_smile:
This seems to be contradicting what Charles is saying.

Also is it really a good policy to force new and unwitting users to act as
guinea-pigs? Should all new users be pushed into finding and fixing bugs?
Would it really be bad to give them a clear and easy route to a less buggy
version?
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile:

#19

Hi Tom, all,

Hi :slight_smile:
This seems to be contradicting what Charles is saying.

no, they are on the same page :slight_smile:

Also is it really a good policy to force new and unwitting users to act as
guinea-pigs? Should all new users be pushed into finding and fixing bugs?

Finding bugs yes, who would find them else? One version is older and so
has been more experienced in all its features and corner cases, another
one has more features that need to be tested in real life work to find
regressions or bugs on those new features.

Would it really be bad to give them a clear and easy route to a less buggy
version?

This is what is done, you, as a user, decide which version is good for
you, the older one or the new one. Even with all the tests we are doing
before a release, we won't be able to find all the bugs that are
triggered by a specific use of the suite, there are too many different
ways to use it.

Kind regards
Sophie

#20

Hi :slight_smile:
This seems to contradict what both Charles and what Florian Reisinger were
saying.

It does seem to make more sense though. It kinda explains why people might
prefer one branch or the other one, which was very unclear from Charles and
Florian's posts.

It also kinda explains the graphic on the;
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleasePlan
page, although that graphic doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Do other
people understand it? There used to be a neat little graph which kinda
boggled the eyes at first but began to make sense after staring at it for a
while.

The bit about "master branch" was a bit beyond me but suggested an answer
to the older thread about how bug-fixes added to the older branch manage to
get into the newer branch. Still i am sure i am not the only one confused
by such a thing.

So Nino's answer suggests that some people might prefer the branch that has
matured because by that time it is more stable. So releases with a higher
3rd digit are more mature, more stable and less likely to have problems.
The only downside is that you get less features.

Then it also makes sense that people would often prefer to use the younger,
less mature branch even though it hasn't had as many bug-fixes added to
it.

However this seems to contradict what Charles was saying about both
branches being fully stable. So which is wrong?
Regards from
Tom :slight_smile: