Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

LibreOffice 24.2 Will Succeed LibreOffice 7.6

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • LibreOffice 24.2 Will Succeed LibreOffice 7.6

    Phoronix: LibreOffice 24.2 Will Succeed LibreOffice 7.6

    One nugget of information in the LibreOffice 7.6 release announcement for those who missed it and deserves calling out specifically... Succeeding LibreOffice 7.6 will not be v7.7 or v8.0 but rather v24.2...

    Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite

  • #2
    But why? What's so wrong about semantic versioning?

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by tildearrow View Post
      But why? What's so wrong about semantic versioning?
      Have you read the article?

      Due to the maturity of the LibreOffice codebase, the current versioning system isn't really reflective of major changes and in turn can be hard to genuinely justify bumping the significant version number.

      Comment


      • #4
        Then that release will be about three times better than 7.x?

        But I like versioning based on release date (see Mesa). LibreOffice is not a library so there is no major release breaking API/ABI compatibility, so the information "how old" the release is, makes more sense than any artificial number.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by tildearrow View Post
          But why? What's so wrong about semantic versioning?
          Why would you use SemVer for an application? Semantic versioning is all about *API compatibility*... there's no API to be compatible with.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by tildearrow View Post
            But why? What's so wrong about semantic versioning?
            As a user it is easier for me to know I am running a really outdated version if it says 2012.2 than if it says 5.4.

            As a developer I prefer semantic versioning on libraries I depend on.

            Since LibreOffice has more users than libraries built in top of it, and it apparently preserves stability, it makes sense to me that they put users in front of downstream developers.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Delgarde View Post

              Why would you use SemVer for an application? Semantic versioning is all about *API compatibility*... there's no API to be compatible with.
              Well, there are changes in file formats, GUI changes, new features added, and things of that nature. Personally, I'd prefer a blend of SemVer and DateVer like 7.7-24.2. While that seems like a clusterfuck of numbers, it would make sense once people got used to Major Version.Minor Version-Year.Month. You could even tack on .Day.Hour for people that offer daily builds or do CI on every git commit.

              In one glance we'd be able to tell the major version, minor version, and the build date to know how up to date we are.

              Comment


              • #8
                I don't think this software is mature at all, I would more call it maybe dated or legacy.
                The only goal seems to be similar to MS Word but slightly worse but never better in anything (except cost).

                So no real linux user will use it, people that switched to linux to have a cost free windows more or less 1:1 replacement and work in some office will use it, but that's about it.

                Why would I ever use such a horrible laggy slow ram murdering software if I not absolutely have to? I mean linux users are to some degree mostly developers, for them this crap software is either no option or torture.

                No automatic version control not even optional where it puts the odf in some sort of git repository. You could even extract the zip file and have the xml files and stuff in git then you could even see differences and stuff, but even a purely binary version system would be better than the nothingness we have now.

                I guess the multi-OS support partially is responsible for this horrible code base and speed, but firefox is also multi-os and while it's not the fastest it's still more modern and faster than libreoffice.

                I rather see emacs mature to have good integrated odf output of org files than this peace of garbage become better. And yes it will internally use libreoffice to convert to odf. And no it's not just because one is for txt files and one for this painted text files (put the formating in the text file directly), abiword and gnumeric showed that software don't have to to such a ram eating slow peace of shit.

                And yes MS Office sucks similarly, you don't want to make a clone of a horrible software in the first place (without making it significantly better).

                Comment


                • #9
                  And yes why not have a markdown mode, if not with org-mode then with some other markdown, internally it can convert markdown to some sort of odf file, is it the small parts that are still written in Java that makes the software suck so much?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by blackiwid View Post
                    I don't think this software is mature at all, I would more call it maybe dated or legacy.
                    The only goal seems to be similar to MS Word but slightly worse but never better in anything (except cost).

                    So no real linux user will use it, people that switched to linux to have a cost free windows more or less 1:1 replacement and work in some office will use it, but that's about it.

                    Why would I ever use such a horrible laggy slow ram murdering software if I not absolutely have to? I mean linux users are to some degree mostly developers, for them this crap software is either no option or torture.

                    No automatic version control not even optional where it puts the odf in some sort of git repository. You could even extract the zip file and have the xml files and stuff in git then you could even see differences and stuff, but even a purely binary version system would be better than the nothingness we have now.

                    I guess the multi-OS support partially is responsible for this horrible code base and speed, but firefox is also multi-os and while it's not the fastest it's still more modern and faster than libreoffice.

                    I rather see emacs mature to have good integrated odf output of org files than this peace of garbage become better. And yes it will internally use libreoffice to convert to odf. And no it's not just because one is for txt files and one for this painted text files (put the formating in the text file directly), abiword and gnumeric showed that software don't have to to such a ram eating slow peace of shit.

                    And yes MS Office sucks similarly, you don't want to make a clone of a horrible software in the first place (without making it significantly better).
                    I've used OOO and then LO to write bids for at least the past 15 years. Open my template, fill it out, export as PDF, send to customer.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X