![[TEST] Document Foundation Community](https://communitytest.documentfoundation.org/images/discourse-logo-sketch.png){kind=logo}
I'm so confused by the multiple version that I have to ask.
Several neighbors are "eligible" for me to install LibreOffice.
One has Windows XP.
One has Windows 7 and o9ne has Windows 8.
One has Ubuntu and one has Linux Mint.
Another has Red Hat and another has a Mac.
What version shall I use for each?
Thanks.
No great mystery.
If they are more conservative--LibreOffice 4.2.6 is a solid build, somewhat lacking in the latest office features.
http://www.libreoffice.org/download/libreoffice-still/
If they have more tolerance for change, and accept the potential for some as yet undescribed bugs affecting use, then early adoption of the 4.3.0 branch is a reasonable choice.
http://www.libreoffice.org/download/libreoffice-fresh/
Both are good well tested software packages.
Interesting answer.
I think you're saying that 4.2.6 is essentially bugfree, but 4.3.x is not.
I suppose that an "undescribed" bug is one that the LO developers dd not
discover during their testing, and that we users are the next test bed.
I generally eschew programs with version numbers ending in 0, for that
very reason.
I just checked and I see that I have v4.0.1.2. "Check for updates" tells
me that 4.2.5 (no typo!) is available for manual downloading. Where are
4.2.6 and 4.3.0?
Pikov, *,
From: Pikov Andropov [mailto:pikov22@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2014 6:31 PM
To: users@global.libreoffice.org
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] What version?> No great mystery.
>
> If they are more conservative--LibreOffice 4.2.6 is a solid build, somewhat
lacking in the latest office features.
> http://www.libreoffice.org/download/libreoffice-still/
>
> If they have more tolerance for change, and accept the potential for some
as yet undescribed bugs affecting use, then early adoption of the 4.3.0
branch is a reasonable choice.
> http://www.libreoffice.org/download/libreoffice-fresh/
>
> Both are good well tested software packages.Interesting answer.
I think you're saying that 4.2.6 is essentially bugfree, but 4.3.x is not.
I suppose that an "undescribed" bug is one that the LO developers dd not
discover during their testing, and that we users are the next test bed.
I generally eschew programs with version numbers ending in 0, for that
very reason.I just checked and I see that I have v4.0.1.2. "Check for updates" tells
me that 4.2.5 (no typo!) is available for manual downloading. Where are
4.2.6 and 4.3.0?
See the URLs provided, they will detect the browser language in use and offer that build of LibreOffice.
The rest of your comment is correct. No shame in avoiding the initial 4.3.0 or 4.3.1 release, but by the 4.3.2 release (week of Sep 22, 2014) as the 4.2.7 release is finalized (4.2 branch EOL is 19 Nov) --all users should be considering a shift to the 4.3 branch by that point. And then briefly remain on only the 4.3 branch until release of the initial 4.4.0 build (week of 26 Jan, 2015)--which will coincide with the 4.3.5 release.
More details and rational for the time based release train are on the project wiki here: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Release_Plan
Download the Windows version for all Windows users. The Linux users
likely have versions tailored for their distro available.
Hello Pikov,
No great mystery.
If they are more conservative--LibreOffice 4.2.6 is a solid build,
somewhat lacking in the latest office features.
http://www.libreoffice.org/download/libreoffice-still/
If they have more tolerance for change, and accept the potential for
some as yet undescribed bugs affecting use, then early adoption of the
4.3.0 branch is a reasonable choice.http://www.libreoffice.org/download/libreoffice-fresh/
Both are good well tested software packages.
Interesting answer.
I think you're saying that 4.2.6 is essentially bugfree, but 4.3.x is
not.
Sigh. Both are NOT bugfree. Stable is a stage and no software ca be bug free.
Best,
Charles.
Hello again,
I'm so confused by the multiple version that I have to ask.
Several neighbors are "eligible" for me to install LibreOffice.
One has Windows XP.
One has Windows 7 and o9ne has Windows 8.
One has Ubuntu and one has Linux Mint.
Another has Red Hat and another has a Mac.What version shall I use for each?
There are 2 questions really. There are the binaries for Windows, the binaries for mac the ones for red hat (rpm) & the ones for mint (deb). Point their browsers to the LibreOffice download page and it should guess the proper binaries immediately. On linux there is no need to download from our website . It will be directly in their app store or software repository.
As for which version: they are your neighbours? They do not stream financial data in real time in and out of their office suite? They don't do the accounting nor the legal documents management of a fortune 500 company?
Have them download the fresh version. And let's stop spreading fear about this branch. It is stable, there won't be data loss or anything of that kind.
Best,
Charles.
Hi 
+1
(to James's suggestion.)
I think most people on this mailing list would probably agree with getting
the 4.2.6.
Blimey! The downloads page is now really complicated for non-English
versions!! In fact it might even be impossible, unless you edit the
url-bar at the top of the page!
[edit: i did finally manage it by going back-to-front and upside-down]
1. Lets say you start by picking the operating system by clicking the 1st
sentence under the right-hand buttons. That makes the page jump downwards
to the list of OSes. Click on Windows. This sets the left-hand buttons to
download the 4.3.0.
2. Now lets scroll back down to select the 4.2.6, ignoring the confusion
about tick-boxes just click on the version you want (most of us suggest the
4.2.6). The page jumps back up to the top but instead of being the Windows
download it has been changed back to the one for your distro (either deb or
rpm). = errr, ok lets not get into a infinite loop by going back to step
1, lets push on instead
3. Now to change the language from whatever the page detected as your
language click on the 2nd sentence under the buttons to the right. Gets
you to this page;
http://www.libreoffice.org/download/libreoffice-fresh/?lang=pick
Select a language and you find yourself back at the downloads page but now
the page is on 4.3.0, and still Windows. Most of the page is still in the
language detected for your system but has a couple of bits in the language
selected.
4. Ok, lets avoid the 1-2 loop by re-doing step 2 first to get the stable,
sorry "Still" (or is it stagnant?) version. This time it worked but i'm
sure it reset my language last time.
5. Now go back to the first thing listed on the right-hand side, under the
buttons there to the right, and change OS back to Windows (again?).
Phew, so it does work as long as you start at the end and work your way
backwards up the page!!
Note that the tick-boxes at the bottom are not really tick-boxes so you
can't untick them. To get the version you want you have to try to untick
the one that you do want! I struggled with that until i realised i might
be dealing with neurotypical designers instead of logic.
Of course the chances are that the 4.3.0 will be plenty stable enough for
your neighbours but if they do run into problems you then have to decide
whether to;
1. rename the user-profile or trouble-shoot it
2. reinstall or downgrade
and then finally
3. downgrade anyway and explain that you gave them the slightly less
stable version first time. This should help encourage them to look on
updates and upgrades as a good thing! (NOT!!)
The way most people on this mailing list recommend doing it is to give them
the 4.2.6 and then if you do have to upgrade them it's more of a positive
thing and increases your reputation in a positive way.
Regards from
Tom
Hi
With all due respect Charles it is not your reputation on the line
here. It's Pikov's.
I realize it is important for Pikov to do the right thing - don't get me wrong. Hence my questions earlier: what are his neighbours' needs? Are they very complex?
Perhaps he can try the Fresh line and see for himself?
Also you are seldom here, on this mailing list, to directly help
users. It's left to those of us who are here day in and day out. Our
experience points to it being wiser to give new users the "still"
versions that have had bug-patches applied rather than fresh ones with
as-yet-unknown problems.I know you need to get more people doing bug-testing for you but lets
not do it at the expense of Pikov or others in a similar position.
My bet is exactly this: that the choice won't be made on anybody's expense. But let's hear what Pikov has to say.
Best,
Charles.
Again, with all due respect Charles, but I have heard many people on
this list echo that sentiment. It seems to me like every time this
question comes up there are far more people recommending going for the
more stable branch than there are recommending going for the less stable
branch, if there are even any of those.
Tom's suggestion is far from a wild call, although you are of course
free to disagree with it.
Paul
> Hi
> +1
> (to James's suggestion.)
> I think most people on this mailing list would probably agree with
> getting
> the 4.2.6.That is your own wild call and your own opinion. I don't agree with
you. Many people don't agree with you. Stop saying somebody should
get the version you like.Again, with all due respect Charles, but I have heard many people on
this list echo that sentiment. It seems to me like every time this
question comes up there are far more people recommending going for the
more stable branch than there are recommending going for the less stable
branch, if there are even any of those.Tom's suggestion is far from a wild call, although you are of course
free to disagree with it.
It is a wild call not because it is unreasonable (it isn't) but because it is peremptory.
Yes, we can read here, on this list, that the newer branch is a problem. We have read it since several years but I'd like to point out two rather different elements.
- the same people complain about the same things for years, right here. For instance Tom has always said here and elsewhere he was not understanding the reason of two branches. Noop has always complained about the two branches and the release pace. It does not make their opinion invalid, but I'm suggesting a pattern here.
- This list is interesting, because it is one type of location. As it happens, my main contributions these past months to the project have been creating and sharing content on social media on behalf of LibreOffice and TDF (yes I'm the main guy behind the daily tweets). You would not believe how different the feedback is. True, people report bugs just like with anything else, but 90% of the time, the people on the social media are users who keep asking for new features and want more and more of them. There was to my knowledge, since January 2014 exactly two people who wrote that they experienced a bug (with the newer branch) and were switching back to the older one. And we get feedback everyday from several different people, so that could give you an idea of the volume we're dealing here with.
What am I trying to show here?
Certainly not that people on social media are "more right" than people here. But that the opinions diverge with demographics, the place, the crowds, the kind of usage, etc. Indeed here, everytime this question arises, the same people will repeat the same arguments. It does not make their opinions unfair or inaccurate; but an echo chamber is also very easy to form on the Internet, esp. on a mailing list. Last but not least, positive feedback is rare compared to negative - here, in FOSS or in any customer service. I'd be shocked it we experienced the opposite
Best,
Charles.
No great mystery.
If they are more conservative--LibreOffice 4.2.6 is a solid build, somewhat lacking in the latest office features.
http://www.libreoffice.org/download/libreoffice-still/
Not for everyone... the fact that the new feature of 'inline editing of Input fields' is BROKEN (regression) when it comes to pasting into it, the entire 4.2.x line has been totally unusable to us (and many others who rely on this capability).
If they have more tolerance for change, and accept the potential for some as yet undescribed bugs affecting use, then early adoption of the 4.3.0 branch is a reasonable choice.
http://www.libreoffice.org/download/libreoffice-fresh/Both are good well tested software packages.
Still? Fresh? Mature? Toddler? Teenager?
This is not just nonsense, it is insanity.
Do it like Debian:
4.2.x = Stable
4.3.x = Testing
Then move on to more important things - like fixing the above mentioned bug so a large segment of users can actually use these newer 'stable' versions.
Tom,
Please stop this passive-aggressive behaviour. Users' request are not spam. Why do you call them that?
Anyway, you ask a good question. On these channels we receive three kind of questions and here's how things tend to work:
1) request for feature : people or the biggest majority of people are replied to in all cases. Either the feature or something approaching exists and we point it to them , otherwise we answer to the best of our ability (maybe sometimes we know we are close to release the feature, sometimes we don't, etc.)
2) users support question: "I want to do X but when I try Y happens (bug or otherwise)": users support can happen on the spot (see our Google + community for these instances, it works really well) or we redirect them here or on ask.libreoffice.org
3) general interest question: "will LibreOffice soon merge with T-Mobile? Who are you? Where am I?" -> again it is answered on the spot.
Hope this helps,
Charles.
Personally, I would do the following for Windows XP through Win7. I do not work with 8 or 8.1.
Install 4.2.6. When 4.2.7 comes out, you might want to update to that one, but it is not really needed.
Once 4.3.x gets to 4.3.3 or 4.3.4, then go to the 4.3.x line - if wanted. I may or may not be going to 4.3.x earlier than 4.3.3, but that is my choice and it differs from others.
Yes, the question really is "what are your neighbors' needs" and yours as well.
For now, personally, try 4.3.6 on the Windows their XP systems.
I still have a few of them left in my home/office. The others are Win7/home and various Linux systems. I am typing this from my main desktop that runs Linux Mint 16 with MATE desktop environment. My needs and wants "require" me to use Linux - Mint 16 for now - for my main "production" system. I do use a Win7 laptop for my secondary system, with a Linux boot partition to deal with any Linux-only "needs".
So the long and the short of this - - What do your neighbors want and need from their system and their Office suite? In my personal opinion LibreOffice 4.2.6 will start a new user out just fine.
I have not updated my systems from 4.2.5 yet - too much other things to do - but I will when I have tome
Tim Lungstrom - New York State, USA
Installing LibreOffice on people systems since the "3.3.x days".
Stopped using MS Office at their 2003 version and never looked back.
Hi Charles,
Thanks for the info on a different feedback system generating a
different view of the topic. That was very useful, and I think should
have been mentioned *much* earlier.
It is likely the the people who mostly come to this list are the ones
with problems, so we are likely to see a higher incidence of people
wanting the more stable branch.
While that may negate my opinion that the primary download should be
switched from the less stable branch to the more stable branch, I still
feel that the best approach would be to offer both as equal choices,
with clear explanations.
Or perhaps even to do away with the one branch completely, and
concentrate more on a single branch, if the difference in stability is
so negligible, as you keep suggesting. However, I feel that the
difference is probably big enough to warrant keeping both branches, and
therefore big enough to warrant having two *equal* download choices,
*with* explanations.
But thank you for contributing this constructive information that has
helped this discussion move forward.
Paul
Hi
Oddly on the Users Support mailing list we tend to get a lot of questions
asking for support and not so many posts telling us that they don't need
support.
I guess if people were asking for technical support in the social media
thing then they would be a bit lost, right! Would you solve their problem
for them or push their 'spam' to the proper channels?
Regards from
Tom
Hello Paul,
Hi Charles,
Thanks for the info on a different feedback system generating a
different view of the topic. That was very useful, and I think should
have been mentioned *much* earlier.It is likely the the people who mostly come to this list are the ones
with problems, so we are likely to see a higher incidence of people
wanting the more stable branch.While that may negate my opinion that the primary download should be
switched from the less stable branch to the more stable branch, I still
feel that the best approach would be to offer both as equal choices,
with clear explanations.Or perhaps even to do away with the one branch completely, and
concentrate more on a single branch, if the difference in stability is
so negligible, as you keep suggesting. However, I feel that the
difference is probably big enough to warrant keeping both branches, and
therefore big enough to warrant having two *equal* download choices,
*with* explanations.
At the beginning of the discussion I had not understood that it was your concern. Now I do. I completely agree of a need for a description of the two branches. We disagree on the priority that should be given on each of these although I do see merit in presenting them on equal footage. That is just me though, I am far from being alone in this.
Fyi maybe it is my browser but I see that on the homepage clicking on download will dispmay a menu with the two branches. Surely that is an acceptable behaviour?
Cheers,
Charles.
Hi Charles,
Fyi maybe it is my browser but I see that on the homepage clicking on
download will dispmay a menu with the two branches. Surely that is an
acceptable behaviour?
Yes, I see that menu, and that menu is fine as far as I'm concerned,
other than the branch wording, which is a different discussion. It
*would* be very nice to have a short description of each branch there,
but even in a smaller font, it would probably just make the menu look
cluttered. Even more reason to use sensible, well known terms there, as
people will only have the terms to go on.
It's mainly the download page, the one at:
http://www.libreoffice.org/download/libreoffice-fresh/
which is the default when clicking the big shiny "Download Now" button
on the homepage, that is an issue for me. Even trying to go to just:
http://www.libreoffice.org/download/
gets one redirected to the Fresh branch.
Paul
P.S. I'm not sure why, but your mails are being addressed to both me and
the list, with my address coming first, which means a) I get it twice,
and b) when I hit reply, it replies by default to just you, instead of
to the list. This isn't the case with most other mails from the list,
so it seems to be something misconfigured on your side.
I didn't say, bugfree, Charles. I said "essentially bugfree". Don't be a
hardass.
Why? Because I asked the original question?