MorphOS Developer
Posts: 1035 from 2004/9/23
Quote:
Jim wrote:
Personally, I have always considered 1.1 to be the equivalent of 1.10 as the need for additional decimal points beyond whole numbers is usually done to indicate minor revisions and their scope.
Numerically, 3.10 is less than 3.9.
So I must admit that I too am confused about following 3.9 with 3.10.
"3.10" is a "version string", "version id" or "version information". It is
not a version number.
This "version information" contains a version number and a revision number. They are two seperate numbers.
Sometime people add sub revisions, build numbers etc, but usually that overkill and makes compating just more complicated than needed. Especially in linux there are creapy version strings you cannot even compare without knowing the source base. e.g. the libssl versions. Those make it very hard to compare.
Thats why we tend not to use more than version and revision unless we are forced, too. Last time we did was the hotfix for non booting ISOs on Macs, where the iso got another digit. This was done mainly because we did not have the time to change all version informations on the iso. This way they stayed valid.
Version number and revision numbers are completly unrelated. There is no specific revision which flips the version number, because it is not a combined number, just two different. The first usually is reserved for API changes or big improvements, while the second is just a count to tell there is a difference in binary.
