On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Keith N. McKenna <[email protected]> wrote: > Greetings All; > > I was going through FAQ's and other pages on the AOO (incubating) site and > noticed that many still are showing that we support Windows 2000 as a > baseline operating system. I though I remembered some discussions a while > back on this list around that subject and thought we had decided that we > would no longer do that due to lack of testing resources. >
IMHO, "support" is determined by what we do, not by what we say. If no one is testing with Windows 2000, then it is hard to say we support it. And if Microsoft does not make Windows 2000 CD's available to developers for testing, due to a lawsuit, then it is rather difficult for anyone who wants to test. Not impossible, but they would need to get access to CD's or ISO images through unofficial means. Of course, we could have a dozen people say we *should* support Windows 2000. But should does not mean anything. We really need to find even a single person who says they *will* test with Windows 2000 and fix any problems that arise. Until that happens we don't really support Windows 2000 in any meaningful way. > I went back through the archives and did find a number of threads but they > never seemed to reach a definite conclusion. I we are going to continue to > support it all well and good, but if we cannot then all FAQ's and other > documentation on the site should change to reflect that. > Support is not determined by consensus wishes. It is determined by someone actually doing it. Do we have any evidence that users have successfully installed and used AOO 3.4.x on Windows 2000? If it works, we might just list it "not a tested configuration, but some users report success.". In other words, between "tested and supported" and "known to be broken" is a middle territory where it is "use at your own risk". -Rob > Regards > Keith >
