On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 2:24 AM, <robert_w...@us.ibm.com> wrote: > Simon Phipps <si...@webmink.com> wrote on 06/05/2011 08:49:19 PM: > > => > > > I read all that Rob. Nothing in there about the plan to continue > creating, > > building and delivering OpenOffice.org on all the platforms and in all > the > > locales it is today, along with an estimate for the IPMT of how big the > task > > is, whether it's adequately staffed, what infrastructure it needs and so > > on. > > > > Your focus on the ODF market is laudable and you know I've been > supporting > > similar aims for even longer than you have. But my big concern remains > > making sure that throughout 2011 there's a fresh, live consumer binary > being > > produced to keep the enormous existing user-base satisfied. > > > > No Simon, it was not in the email. I didn't think it was necessary to > repeat what is already in the very first paragraph of the proposal on the > wiki: > > > "OpenOffice.org is comprised of (6) personal productivity applications: > word processor, spreadsheet, presentation graphics, drawing, equation > editor, and database. OpenOffice.org supports Windows, Solaris, Linux and > Macintosh operation systems. OpenOffice.org is localized, supporting over > 110 languages worldwide. " > > I don't see a problem here. There are competitors in this market that > release only every three years. They seem to have users. There are some > that release updates every quarter. They have users as well. And some do > something in the middle. They have users as well. So there is no "one > true answer" here. > > The OOo releases have recently been like: > > 3.0 Oct 2008 > 3.1 May 2009 > 3.2 Feb 2010 > 3.3 Jan 2011 > > So the most recent interval was a one year cycle between releases. Even > with the overhead and resulting downtime of moving our tent to Apache, I > don't see why we couldn't aim for a stable 3.4 in Q1 2012 or earlier and > not frustrate customer expectations. Not saying we couldn't do > something more aggressive than that. I'm all in favor of getting to a > more steady heart beat, say quarterly betas or something like that. > Release early and often. But the details are for the project to work out. >
The release cadence for point releases is more frequent than that. S.
