RE : Re: [steering-discuss] Version numbering of LibO
Top posting from my phone...
This is not an easy answer to give. Both strategies have pros and cons. My
advice would be to start where we are but alter the numbering scheme wildly:
3.3, 3.5 and then 4.0 instead of 3.3, 3.4 and 3.5 like OOo.
Le 3 nov. 2010, 12:03 PM, "Michael Meeks" <email@example.com> a
On Tue, 2010-11-02 at 14:57 +0100, Andre Schnabel wrote: > I'd rather
continue OOo version number s...
I think being similar enough to it is worthwhile. On the other hand,
think being slaved to Hamburg's development schedule is unfortunate
overall. I'd like to release on a different cadence.
But for now it is fine of course. And in future a major version bump
firstname.lastname@example.org <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot
-- E-mail to
instructions on how to unsubscribe...
E-mail to email@example.com for instructions on how to unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/steering-discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
- RE : Re: [steering-discuss] Version numbering of LibO · Charles-H. Schulz
Impressum (Legal Info)
: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our trademark policy