Welcome to the archive of the old FlatPress support forum. Browse more than a decade of FlatPress wisdom! Login is disabled.

The current FlatPress support forum is available here: forum.flatpress.org
Poll: Is the new version number too much confusing?
  • From the comments of the blog: (use this discussion to comment)
    even though it *is* a bit counterintuitive, the version should be parsed this way: MAJOR.MINOR.MINORMINOR so Major Version is still 0, while Minor is 1010 (and Minor Minor version is 0 at the moment) It is not a decimal point, it is a “separator”. Minor always reads as YMo where Y is the year and Mo is the month. This year Y went two digits because “0” for ‘10 was meaningless ;) I didn’t feel like going 1.010 because I don’t feel like FP is feature complete for a 1.0 version… when i went for this versioning scheme I believed FP would be complete for 2010… but I’m never satisfied ;) If it’s really that confusing I’ll bump the version number starting from the next minor release (0.1010.1 -> 1.010.1)

  • In my opinion, no, there are no doubts :-)
  • @NoWhereMan I think you're right. FP works very well but maybe he could be improved more. However PHP function compare_function doesn't create doubts :-)
  • I guess you meant version_compare(); LOL I didn't even know about this function and reinvented the wheel with system_version_compare(); I'll remove it in the next minor release :)
  • I guess you meant version_compare(); LOL

    Yes, sorry ;-) I shouldn't write in English in the evening: I write a lot of bullshit. OT: For example this is my way to know if I can use PrettyURLs with Filters in plugins: define('PRETTYURLS_FILTER', !(version_compare(SYSTEM_VER, '0.909.1', '<=')==1)); Returning IT: there is also changelog file that can solve any doubts of users.
  • i think you should go for 1.whatever. 0.1010.1 just doesn't look any good. software is never finished but that doesn't mean you should always stay at 0.x... btw, 0.1010.1 is way too long. there are releases like every half a year, and there are only 2 or 3 releases between major number bumps (at max), so why such a long version number? look at drupal, they only use 2 levels, like 7.0, 6.13 and so. for flatpress x.y.z would be more than enough, not like x.yyyy.z, it's just tedious... with x.y.z, x indicates some BIG change (content format change or something like that), y indicates compatibility breakage of themes and things like that (something the admin should test and take care of), z indicates minor bugfixes which should result in a seamless update. with version numbers like 0.703.6.1, 0.812.1 or 0.1010.1 you don't say anything about the importance of changes. and where did 0.727.3.4 go? or 0.853.9? there's no consistency in digits (at times it's just 0.x, then it goes 0.x.y, but occasionally it's even 0.x.y.z, wtf ?!), let alone continuity between numbers. these version numbers are just so random, and TBH i hate them. IMHO the best way to solve this is to release trunk as 1.0.0 and then make up your mind and pick a versioning scheme (i'd prefer the one mentioned above) and keep using that, coz the current versioning scheme (or more like, the lack of it) causes nothing else but confusion. and numbers (be it x, y, or z, any of them) should be bumped in increments, like 1->2->3. not like 703->804->812->909. that's just .... ouch. please don't be offended, i love flatpress, i wrote this post to express my opinion, not to piss you off :)
  • This discussion has been closed.
    All Discussions
    Start a New Discussion

    Howdy, Stranger!

    It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


    In this Discussion