Philosophy of build numbers
simplsol at aol.com
simplsol at aol.com
Tue Nov 14 18:56:48 CST 2006
For what it's worth, I've never liked double decimals or alphas in
build numbers; I like the build numbers to be numbers.
What I use is "x.yyzzz". X is the version, the two ys are minor
versions and the three zs are internal build numbers. For example Rev
2.07004. This allows infinite versions, a hundred minor versions, and a
thousand builds. It is also easy to see which version the build belongs
to. And I can sort historical builds numerically.
I helps avoid the situation where you run out of space for numbers:
what comes after OS X 10.3.9? Or 10.4.9? Or 10.9 - if the world is not
ready for 11.0?
Just my 2 cents.
From: ambassador at fourthworld.com
To: use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
Sent: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 4:27 PM
Subject: Philosophy of build numbers
I'm extending the build system for my apps to use build numbers, and
it seems there are at least two different philosophies about this:
a) Increment the build number each time every build is made,
regardless of version.
PRO: One number tells you what you need to know
CON: That number can get quite larger over the life of a product
b) Increment the build number each time, but reset to 1 for the first
build of a major upgrade (the number to the left of the first decimal).
PRO: The build number will likely never exceed the hundreds, even for
long-running successful programs
CON: You must also know the version to know where a build is in the
Is there of convention use widely enough to make alternatives easy to
-- Richard Gaskin
Fourth World Media Corporation
Ambassador at FourthWorld.com http://www.FourthWorld.com
use-revolution mailing list
use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and
security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from
across the web, free AOL Mail and more.
More information about the use-livecode