openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From janI <j...@apache.org>
Subject Re: What does "supported" mean for us?
Date Tue, 01 Jan 2013 17:58:13 GMT
On 1 January 2013 18:50, Rob Weir <robweir@apache.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 12:06 PM, janI <jani@apache.org> 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 <robweir@apache.org> 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
> >>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message