[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Info Center for Neon.3
- From: "charles+zeligsoft.com" <charles@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2017 10:02:10 -0400
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
Iâm with Fred on this one.
Many (industrial) companies rely on older software simply because of the life time of their products - and not all are making use of LTS to manage this. In such environments, it is sometimes a great effort to move to newer releases, especially ones that occur yearlyâ The question is rather where do we draw the line between keeping everything and suggesting downloadable archives (or LTS) for older releases?
> On 2017-04-13, at 09:52 , Frederic Gurr <frederic.gurr@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I have to disagree on that one. I'm pretty sure that quite a lot of
> people rely on documentation for old releases. Not everyone can always
> switch to the latest release, especially if a company ships a RCP based
> product that it has to support. In that case, the latest info center
> could be misleading or plain wrong, compared to older releases.
> On 13.04.2017 15:16, Gunnar Wagenknecht wrote:
>> One overall. Frankly, I don't see a need for presenting old documentation.
> cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit