humble suggestion for version numbering?

Discussion in 'Bugless' started by nsurg, Jun 19, 2010.

  1. nsurg
    Offline

    nsurg New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2010
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +0
    All thanks to Pete for what seems to be the best version of a droid rom out there, even more amazing considering that his overall approach is essentially coming from one person...

    I wondered if I might make a possible suggestion?
    When I follow threads it is easy to see the update patterns, but might it not be simpler to number the new versions based on the android system first, and then based on pete's mods?

    For example, we could now be on 2.2.2.1b or so, with the first 2.2 referring to the android software base. Another option might be to include start with android as 2.2.57 and then his version as .2? I know it seems like a lot of periods, but lots of other software does this.

    I think it might be easier for the johnny-come-lately crowd to save posts explaining why pete's 1.1 is old, yet 0.2.1 is newer, let alone the archived threads and how-tos out there that refer to the 2.0 based android roms which also had a series of numbers that overlaps.

    I'll shut up now, thanks again for the nice software!
     
  2. mza929
    Offline

    mza929 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2010
    Messages:
    85
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Ratings:
    +0
    yup

    i was thinking the same thing this morning....:icon_ banana:
     
  3. JonDenver'sCopilot
    Offline

    JonDenver'sCopilot Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2010
    Messages:
    158
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +0
    I think its a great idea to make a more standard versioning. However, too many numbers per version may be too much for some people to handle. Maybe something like this:

    Pete left off on v1.1 ESE81, he could just start this as v2.0 RC1 (v.1), v2.0 RC2 (v.2), v2.0 RC2.1 (v.2.1) for anything FRF57 moving to v2.1 RC1 (versions with the next leak) until a final OTA is pushed out.

    I'm sure we could go all day with different ways to version it, I just thought it might weigh in with another idea. Simply put though, the OP is right....a standard versioning is needed to keep continuity between versions.
     
  4. ZeroBarrier
    Online

    ZeroBarrier Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    Pete already does this, hence the FRF57 then his version 0.2.1. You seem to be just nit-picking the fact that he's not using the 2.2 that is a more generalized version numbering.

    I actually like the version numbering as it is, since it gives you a better understanding of what real version of android you are running by just looking at the code version + ROM version.
     
  5. Ecnassianer
    Offline

    Ecnassianer Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2010
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Ratings:
    +0
    Yeah, but it takes a good bit of thinking to figure out that FRF57 is newer than ESE81 as well.

    Not to mention that a fair amount of the time people only write half the version number they're talking about (stop saying 21 when you mean 0.2.1!)

    Having a numbering system that keeps BB releases in a comprehensible order seems like a very good thing for everyone.
     
  6. Se7enLC
    Offline

    Se7enLC Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2009
    Messages:
    1,262
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Ratings:
    +0
    I'll be happy if the version number just keep going up, rather than jumping down. :)

    The numbers don't HAVE to mean anything, but I'll agree that it does get a little confusing to explain that BB version 1.0 and 1.1 are running AndroidOS 2.1 and BB version 0.1 and 0.2 and 0.2.1 are running AndroidOS 2.2. It also gets confusing when numbers get reused.

    For example, google for Bugless Beast 1.2. That came out mere months before 1.1... :p
    [ROM 2.0.1] Bugless Beast V1.2 (3/1/10) by Pete
     
  7. ZeroBarrier
    Online

    ZeroBarrier Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    Unless you don't know how the English alphabet is ordered, it should be common sense that E (as in ESE81) comes before F (as in FRF57).

    Again, anyone with 2 brain cells can figure this out, but I will agree with you to a point; not to many people out there with 2 brain cells, so they say 21 instead of 0.2.1.
     
  8. Ecnassianer
    Offline

    Ecnassianer Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2010
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Ratings:
    +0
    That might fly if they were just letters (E81, F57), but they're acronyms, which have no default sorting order, and are not often alphabetized.

    Consider this similar case (in alphabetical order):

    Windows 3.1
    Windows 7
    Windows 95
    Windows 98
    Windows 2000
    Windows ME
    Windows NT 4
    Windows XP
    Windows Vista

    There's no way to tell the order without knowing it ahead of time (or knowing what sorting method the author intends for you to use).

    Just because you understand it, doesn't mean it's the simplest/best way of doing it.
     
  9. Ecnassianer
    Offline

    Ecnassianer Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2010
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Ratings:
    +0
    Ah, and in the name of being constructive toward the point of this thread I propose:

    OS_Major_Revision.OS_Minor_Revision.Pete_Major_Revision.Pete_MinorRevision (Kernel Revision)

    So the current experimental build would be:
    2.2.0.2b (FRF57)

    And the current stable build would be:
    2.1.1.1 (ESE81)

    That way there's a clear "this is newer than that" understanding, and it's still obvious which build it's based on.

    One weakness I see is that it fails to reflect that BBv1.1 contains a few bits from Froyo/2.2, while previous versions were purely Eclair/2.1. However users can infer that anything higher than 2.1.0.0 has something newer than Eclair, and I doubt many people will care to know the origin of some of the pieces just from reading the version number (that's what the changlog is for!)
     
  10. ZeroBarrier
    Online

    ZeroBarrier Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    Thank you, I was starting to think I was the only one who's head this didn't go over.
     
  11. nerdbox08
    Offline

    nerdbox08 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,154
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Location:
    Michigan
    Ratings:
    +0
    Yup. Android versions work through the alphabet like how they name hurricanes. It seems easy to understand e comes before f to me.

    No matter how you name something, someone, somewhere isn't going to understand; it's normal.
     
  12. MrC1122
    Offline

    MrC1122 Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2010
    Messages:
    166
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Indiana
    Ratings:
    +1
    I could be wrong here, (these are all good ideas) but I think the main point is to make it easier for the noobs to follow and understand. If I had just come on the forum I would probably think that BBv1.1 is newer than BBv0.2.1 and would run into major problems when trying to install roms not knowing that BBv1.1 is not compatible with 2.2. With that being said...I digress.
     
  13. mikes
    Offline

    mikes Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2010
    Messages:
    304
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +0
    I didn't know that. What is ESE an acronym for (Eclair's Super Edible?), FRF (Froyo's Really Fine?)?

    'course, Android seems to be following the alphabet with names, too. Cupcake, Donut, Eclair, Froyo. It seems that it's based first on the ordered alphabet (and therefore it is sortable), and then they find a name to match. So, it's not just an arbitrary acronym. What's next, Gingerbread? Gelato? It will presumably be G-numeral-G-two.digit.numeral.
     
  14. ZeroBarrier
    Online

    ZeroBarrier Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    Google has already named it Gingerbread. The 2 digit number at the end is related to the build (if I'm not mistaken).
     
  15. Ecnassianer
    Offline

    Ecnassianer Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2010
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Ratings:
    +0
    Actually, I'm not even sure it's an acronym. :) I don't actually know what the SE and RF mean... a little bit more on the "version string isn't easy to understand" pile I suppose. :)

    I assumed it had something to do with whether the build was stable or experimental, but that's just the intuition of someone with a CS degree and no android experience.