On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 2:36 PM, Donald Whytock <dwhyt...@apache.org> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Rory O'Farrell <ofarr...@iol.ie> wrote: > >> On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 13:35:23 -0400 >> Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> > Something to consider for AOO 4.1 is the value of a broad public beta >> > program to solicit early feedback on builds. This could be a good >> > complement to our formal QA efforts. >> > >> > A beta program could be set up like this: >> > >> > 1) After feature freeze, and after smoke tests pass on the 3 major >> > platforms, we have a build that has the new code, and doesn't have any >> > known horrible defects. >> > >> > 2) Immediately create a special Release Candidate for the beta, >> > English only, or maybe a combination install with 5 major languages. >> > >> > 3) Vote on the release of the beta via the normal 72-hour PMC vote. >> > Focus on the formal release checks around license, notice, etc. >> > >> > 4) Distribute via SourceForge and/or Apache mirrors. No need to >> > preserve older betas. We'd only keep the most recent one. >> > >> > I just want to make sure that we're all aware this option is >> > available. We can do something that gives wider public exposure than >> > a dev snapshot build, but is less than a final version. The key thing >> > is to meet the formal requirements of an Apache release, but set user >> > expectations that it is a beta. >> > >> > Regards, >> >> A very major problem is that relatively inexperienced user _will_ download >> and use a beta, disregarding any warnings about it being a beta. They will >> increase the support workload, as faults may be due to their inexperience, >> not to shortcomings in the beta, and certainly the stress level for support >> staff as they are hassled to try to obtain recovery of "the most important >> file this load of **** has ruined on me". >> >> A lot of projects list multiple versions of their software with the most > "stable" at the top, and other versions provided below with multiple > caveats attached, such as, "This is the most bleeding edge version we've > got right now, download and try at your own risk...but please provide > feedback if you do." > > As long as the first entry is described as the stable one, I'd like to > think users would get that one. But I've heard I can be naive. >
The concept and expectations of a beta release are well-understood in the industry. We may have some users who are unfamiliar with the concept, but we should be able to find a way to make it clear to everyone. The important thing, I think, is to avoid giving prominence to the beta in the default download page. Maybe even have a special beta page that has extra text setting stability and support expectations, how to report problems, etc. -Rob > Don --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
