Comment 15 for bug 267376

Hi Exsecrabilus, thanks for your input but I think you are missing two
or three key points.

1) Intepid did not ship any beta/RC version of OO 3.0, like they did
with Gnome (2.23), so comparing the two is not valid. If there are any
serious bugs we may not have time to catch them and this could result
in a disappointing and unpolished experience for OO users.

2) There are users just as vocal and adamant as you on the OTHER side,
who would yell and scream if Ubuntu shipped OO 3.0 with bugs, and that
it shouldn't have been pushed in past the feature freeze just to
appease a few people who could easily install it themselves (see #3)
if they weren't concerned with something as stable and thoroughly
tested. A large part of the appeal of Ubuntu to many users is that
when a release comes out, all the applications have been tested for
months already and have all the kinks worked out. If we start throwing
in completely new versions of major applications mere weeks before a
release, Ubuntu will lose a lot of stability and reputation.

3) You (and any other user) will be easily able to install OO 3.0
yourself via a deb/ppa/backport if you so desire. It is a great
candidate for a backport and will probably be backported soon after
release (see https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuBackports for
more information).

This seems like a win/win to me, since users who want stability and
polish get it by default, and users like yourself who want more
bleeding edge can easily enable it in many ways as I mentioned above.
I don't really see the gripe. As such if the decision is to stay with
2.4 for Intrepid (only 6 months after all), I think it makes sense,
and OO 3.0 can be stabilized by Intrepid backport users and Jaunty
alpha/beta testers.