Merging feature/commonsallayout branch
mikekaganski at hotmail.com
Wed Nov 2 03:48:15 UTC 2016
11/2/2016 3:54 AM, Luke Benes пишет:
Us, as in the LibreOffice, the software many of us volunteer to make as good as possible for everyone to enjoy.
Should the Chinese IT manager be embarrassed? Maybe, but coming from a First World nation, it’s hard for me to imaging supporting my family on $800/month, but at least I try to understand. Should my grandfather at almost 80 now be embarrassed? I don’t think so. Maybe I should have tried harder. I know he doesn’t use his Chromebook and never boots to Lubuntu.
The point is there are a lot of people out there for whatever reason still us XP. Despite what you keep suggesting, dropping XP won’t do anything to change them.
From: tlillqvist at gmail.com<mailto:tlillqvist at gmail.com> <tlillqvist at gmail.com><mailto:tlillqvist at gmail.com> on behalf of Tor Lillqvist <tml at iki.fi><mailto:tml at iki.fi>
Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2016 2:13 PM
Subject: Re: Merging feature/commonsallayout branch
Had we already dropped support for XP, it would have been an embarrassing
demonstration and reflected badly on us.
The only ones that should be embarrassed are those still running XP. Also, who are these "us" you are speaking for? --tml
While I agree that no one is to judge if those who are still running XP should be embarrassed or not, this specific consideration doesn't matter here.
Those who chose to stay with XP chose the software branch that isn't updated anymore. They made their choice between fixed set of functionality that is put into XP and evolving set of functionality that is being expanded in later versions. OS being platform, this choice inherently included also choosing to stay with software that supports that OS. And by making that decision, you imply that they suddenly put extra burden on "us" those who volunteer to put their effort into writing LO? Just by deciding to stay with aging OS, without any donation to this community or someone in person, someone magically creates an obligation on "us" and makes it twice as difficult for someone other to support and develop their software?
Instead, I see it another way: they had already made a choice to stay with one stalled branch (XP); they also chose to stay with another (their version of MSO); it's just natural that they can make the same decision about yet another software: say v.5.2 of LO. It does support XP, and is open and free as always; no one ever takes the right to use that from them.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the LibreOffice