On 1 January 2013 18:50, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 12:06 PM, janI <[email protected]> wrote: > > +1 to your definition of "supported", it is funny I just had somewhat the > > same discussion today. > > > > Regarding lifecycle, I would like to suggest that we only support the > > latest release, otherwise we stretch our resources pretty thin. We can > of > > course have a statement that we in general will have a look at critical > > bugs, but they will only be solved in the latest release. > > > > And thinking a little further, there might be something between > "supported" and "deprecated", or at least there might be different > levels of confidence we might have. > > For example, I don't think we're doing any testing with Widows Vista. > We tested Windows XP, 7 and preview version of 8. We have limited > resources. > > So is Vista supported? It certainly isn't deprecated. But neither > is it getting the full QA treatment. Similar questions for Linux > releases. We don't test every release of every distro. We pick the > major ones, such as the Ubuntu LTS releases. > > One way of handling this could be: > > 1) Define our "Class A" platforms, the ones that we give the full test > attention to. Similar to how we treat translations, this list can > grow given sufficient volunteers to cover the testing, and (if bugs > are found) the fixes. > > 2) Class A platforms (or "primary platforms" or "tested platforms" or > "supported platforms" -- whatever we call them) are the ones we > encourage users to use. > > 3) For other platforms we make a wiki-page per platform, were we can > track notes from users on an unique issues they find on that platform. > These combinations are not supported, but may often work. But we > make it easy to collect observations about AOO on that platform, and > make it easy for users to find that info. > > If we do this, then our support statement could read something like: > "We have tested and qualified Apache OpenOffice X.Y on the following > operating system versions. Other operating system versions may work > as well, but may require additional configuration. For the latest > information please consult the following wiki page..." > > -Rob > > I do not know this, but would it be possible to make a QA package (script or something) that would make it easy for skilled users to do QA of a platform (e.g. vista). I have f.x. vista running and could do it, but I do not have a clue what should be done, and there could be other users like me out there.
Microsoft have something I think they call certification scripts, that checks if your platform is ok for a given product, could we do something the same, that would be a one-time effort. Jan I. > > rgds > > Jan I. > > > > > > On 1 January 2013 17:59, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> When a commercial software vendor says a configuration is "supported" > >> it means something, typically that to the extent the software license > >> includes an entitlement to support, that the vendor will provide that > >> service for that configuration. So saying something is "supported" is > >> essentially an obligation. > >> > >> With a volunteer-run, open source project, "supported" cannot mean > >> quite the same thing. We're not obligated, in any contractual sense, > >> to provide anyone with anything. That's the nature of a volunteer > >> effort. > >> > >> However, users and organizations considering OpenOffice will naturally > >> think in terms of "support", even if they user that term loosely. We > >> use that term as well, in our release notes, etc. But I think we > >> ought to have a more precise definition of what we mean when we say > >> something is "supported", in order to avoid any confusion. This > >> question has come up recently, with regards to the status of Windows > >> 8, where that OS had not been released at the time AOO 3.4.1 was > >> released. > >> > >> So here's a strawman proposal for what "supported" means for us. > >> > >> 1) "Supported" is a statement we make about a specific version of AOO > >> used with a specific platform, e.g., AOO 3.4.1 with Windows XP SP3 or > >> AOO 3.4 with Ubuntu 12.04 LTS. > >> > >> 2) "Supported" means we encourage use of AOO in that configuration. > >> We have high confidence that the combination is stable, that it works > >> well and is safe. > >> > >> 3) Our confidence in stating something is supported should have a > >> solid basis in testing. Something is not "supported" by us guessing > >> it should work. It is supported only after we have successfully > >> completed testing of that release with that platform. We probably > >> should define exactly what level of testing is required. > >> > >> 4) "Supported" also implies that the supported configuration is > >> sufficiently available and there is sufficient expertise that we have > >> confidence that users will have a high quality experience seeking > >> support on the forums and user list. > >> > >> 5) "Supported" also implies that we stand behind that release and will > >> take necessary steps to correct *critical* bugs, especially security > >> flaws, via rapidly produced point releases where necessary. > >> > >> Note that these are all expectations that a user might have, though > >> any given user might think that "supported" means only a subset of > >> these. > >> > >> What we probably really need is more of a lifecycle statement, > >> including when support for a configuration ends. > >> > >> -Rob > >> >
