--===============0596527077== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary-00=_fzB8JE0B+8X4I5P" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline --Boundary-00=_fzB8JE0B+8X4I5P Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thursday 23 April 2009, Thomas Zander wrote: > On Thursday 23. April 2009 01.17.40 Sven Langkamp wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 4:57 PM, Inge Wallin wrote: > > > We in the marketing group thought that we would try to avoid the same > > > for KOffice 2 and 2.0.0. One way to do it could be to change the > > > release name > > Great initiative, thanks! > > > Very important point. I think changing the release name makes sense as a > > lot of users will only see that and won't read any annoucement. One > > thing that was critizied a lot was that KDE 4.0 was marked as a .0, which > > is often associated as a stable release. Maybe it would be better to drop > > that and just call it "KOffice 2 Plattform Release/Tech Preview". This > > would lower the risk that it's shortened to just "2.0" in the press. > > "Preview" might be a bit misleading for a final release, but on the other > > side KDE 4.0 showed that you can't be careful enough about that. > > Changing the version number is probably not a great idea as it will confuse > people that *did* grasp the release numbering that we (and others) have > been using for years. > So calling it the 2.0.0 release of the KOffice Platform works for me. > > maybe we should put a 'beta' text just below the logo on our website, just > to hop onto that bandwagon ;) Yes I agree, "KOffice Platform 2.0" sounds the best way to show that it is more about platform than application, unfortunately, the platform isn't API/ABI stable, which isn't shown in that naming. And yes changing the numbering is now impossible, we are two years of releases too late. -- Cyrille Berger --Boundary-00=_fzB8JE0B+8X4I5P Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thursday 23 April 2009, Thomas Zander wrote:
> On Thursday 23. April 2009 01.17.40 Sven Langkamp wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 4:57 PM, Inge Wallin <inge@lysator.liu.se> wrote:
> > > We in the marketing group thought that we would try to avoid the same
> > > for KOffice 2 and 2.0.0. One way to do it could be to change the
> > > release name
>
> Great initiative, thanks!
>
> > Very important point. I think changing the release name makes sense as a
> > lot of users will only see that and won't read any annoucement. One
> > thing that was critizied a lot was that KDE 4.0 was marked as a .0, which
> > is often associated as a stable release. Maybe it would be better to drop
> > that and just call it "KOffice 2 Plattform Release/Tech Preview". This
> > would lower the risk that it's shortened to just "2.0" in the press.
> > "Preview" might be a bit misleading for a final release, but on the other
> > side KDE 4.0 showed that you can't be careful enough about that.
>
> Changing the version number is probably not a great idea as it will confuse
> people that *did* grasp the release numbering that we (and others) have
> been using for years.
> So calling it the 2.0.0 release of the KOffice Platform works for me.
>
> maybe we should put a 'beta' text just below the logo on our website, just
> to hop onto that bandwagon ;)
Yes I agree, "KOffice Platform 2.0" sounds the best way to show that it is more about platform than application, unfortunately, the platform isn't API/ABI stable, which isn't shown in that naming.


And yes changing the numbering is now impossible, we are two years of releases too late.


--
Cyrille Berger

--Boundary-00=_fzB8JE0B+8X4I5P-- --===============0596527077== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ koffice-devel mailing list koffice-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice-devel --===============0596527077==--