Rob Weir wrote:
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 8:20 AM, Keith N. McKenna
<keith.mcke...@comcast.net> wrote:
Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
On 11/21/12 5:33 PM, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
Rob Weir wrote:
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Keith N. McKenna
<keith.mcke...@comcast.net> wrote:
Regina Henschel wrote:
Hi Jürgen,
Jürgen Schmidt schrieb:
Hi,
first of all I would like to volunteer again as release manager for
our
next release if it's ok for our community.
+1
+1 on that from me also
Second I would like to define with you what our next release will be.
After various discussion and activities on the mailing list and
also at
the ApacheCon, I got the impression that the majority would support a
4.0 version as our next release.
I'm not in favor of an version 4.0 as next release. The changes have
listed below would justify a version "4.0". But I doubt, that they are
possible in a time frame, I see for the next release.
I am with Regina on this one. I do not see a Jan or Feb time frame as
feasible for the design and implementation of a new and still a
comfortable
bit of padding to deal with the inevitable gremlins that will sneak
out of
the woodwork to assure the kind of quality release that is expected of
OpenOffice and that we expect of ourselves.
Uh, Juergen never suggested January or Feburary as a time frame for
4.0. So I don't see how one can dismiss a 4.0 proposal as being
unfeasible based on dates that he never suggested. Maybe we should
ask Juergen what timeframe he had in mind for 4.0? Of course, it
might be possible to do both, provided we have volunteers willing to
own testing and release management for 3.5.
-Rob
As I re-read the post you are correct Rob and I apologize to Juergen for
reading to much between the lines. What timeframe were you considering
for a 4.0 release Juergan?
Well I had indeed not February in mind but when we targeting on end of
March or April we will have more time.
Maybe we can take first a look on what others have in mind to put in the
next release.
Juergen
This sounds like a good idea. My concern is that we have enough time to
adequately the changes, especially the potential UI changes, and that we
address the end of life issues with the 3.x.x line. We do not want to spring
possibly major UI changes on end users without adequate warning.
Is there something users need to do to prepare for UI changes ? ;-)
Rob, have you ever been involved in direct user support? When you make
major UI changes your support structure is going to be inundated with
questions under the best of situations. When you spring them on users
unawares you unleash the tirade of "change for the sake of change"
potentially getting bad publicity for the product.
While it is true that an amount of this is inevitable, a good marketing
and communication campaign can go a long way towards minimizing it. We
cannot loose sight of the act that we are an end user project and not
just for the techie types.
IMHO, if the changes are a bad idea we should never do them. But if
the changes are a good idea then let's get them done, tested and
released without delay. Yes, it will be a surprise for many end
users. As far as I can tell most users still don't know we've moved
to Apache either.
Whether we have moved to Apache or not is of little concern to the
general user. Changing the look and feel of the product he or she is
familiar and comfortable with is.
Do not get me wrong, I am not against change. I am simply adding a voice
of caution that we not inadvertently shoot ourselves in the foot
(figuratively to be sure). The UX work that Kevin and others are going
and the push by you and others for greater marketing presence are all
good things and need to be given sufficient time to have a good impact.
If in the considered judgement of the community the March/April
timeframe is sufficient that is great and we should do it. All I am
doing is raising some considerations that may not always be thought of.
Regards
Keth
-Rob
Regards
Keith
