I'd second this. I know it might break some things short term, but it's much more convient to have zero padded numbers.bourne327 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 12, 2019 2:25 am I know this seems like a silly little thing, but when you guys release version, you should start with version .01 or .001. If you start with 0.17.1 and move to 0.17.9. your next release of 0.17.10 will suddenly jump up and throw all the previous releases out of order. I noticed this because it is how Steam categorizes its releases.
Change Factorio's numeric versionning system
Moderator: ickputzdirwech
-
- Inserter
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 8:02 pm
- Contact:
Re: Version 0.17.11
-
- Burner Inserter
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2017 3:37 pm
- Contact:
Re: Version 0.17.11
If that's the case, you're better off asking Steam to fix it on their end by implementing natural sorting so EVERYONE who uses Steam, Dev and players, benefits. I know my file manager (Total Commander) can handle it and I'm pretty sure modern Windows (and other OSes?) can handle it too. I don't see why Steam can't bother with it.bourne327 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 12, 2019 2:25 am I know this seems like a silly little thing, but when you guys release version, you should start with version .01 or .001. If you start with 0.17.1 and move to 0.17.9. your next release of 0.17.10 will suddenly jump up and throw all the previous releases out of order. I noticed this because it is how Steam categorizes its releases.
Re: Version 0.17.11
Its comman that version 0.17.9 its higher number that 0.17.11
0.17.11 seems for most people as little fix (step up) from version 0.17.1
Bourne have good point with numering.
From 0.18 consider using different method because its confusing for most people.
0.17.11 seems for most people as little fix (step up) from version 0.17.1
Bourne have good point with numering.
From 0.18 consider using different method because its confusing for most people.
- 5thHorseman
- Smart Inserter
- Posts: 1193
- Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 11:21 pm
- Contact:
Re: Version 0.17.11
No, it's not common. Nobody that I know, from hobbyists to the company I work for, would ever think that.
Re: Change Factorio's numeric versionning system
[Koub] I was fed up seeing discussions about numbering system in the release topics, so I created a new one in "Ideas and Suggestions". I'll move-merge into this all further discussion on the subject, and will to some retro-merging as soon as the search function is repaired.
Koub - Please consider English is not my native language.
Re: Change Factorio's numeric versionning system
I understand and would be perfectly happy with padded version numbers. 0.17.01 makes sense and it's obvious to everybody that 0.17.10 is greater than 0.17.09. I also understand the drive behind it... even if it is perhaps of minimal value to only a small number of factorio players who have effectively archived the game. The "0.91 comes after 0.9" convention is foolish IMO. It offers minimal advantage and has a number of drawbacks.
Semantic versioning isn't an objective system, it's still subjective, but it gives you a good baseline methodology to start from. Even if you entirely ignore that specifics of when you change major, minor, and patch versions... the numbering system is basically industry standard with little value in change.
Then again, I'm a dude on the forum for a video game trying to make a case for why different version numbering system are valid or invalid. What am I doing with my life? :p
Semantic versioning isn't an objective system, it's still subjective, but it gives you a good baseline methodology to start from. Even if you entirely ignore that specifics of when you change major, minor, and patch versions... the numbering system is basically industry standard with little value in change.
Then again, I'm a dude on the forum for a video game trying to make a case for why different version numbering system are valid or invalid. What am I doing with my life? :p
Re: Change Factorio's numeric versionning system
Wait, when did this become a serious discussion?
I'd wouldn't be against zero-padded releases, although assuming it's only padded to x.y.01, it implies that there will be between 10 and 99 releases (which, while based on empirical evidence will hold true for the foreseeable future, is just a minor nitpick). Personally it looks a bit tidier if it's not zero-padded, though.
I'd wouldn't be against zero-padded releases, although assuming it's only padded to x.y.01, it implies that there will be between 10 and 99 releases (which, while based on empirical evidence will hold true for the foreseeable future, is just a minor nitpick). Personally it looks a bit tidier if it's not zero-padded, though.
There are 10 types of people: those who get this joke and those who don't.
Re: Change Factorio's numeric versionning system
Semantic versioning exists for SOME reasons. But not for user experience.
Nothing more needs to be said but: Inform yourself why such standards exists and why this is a bad idea.
What can be talked about and which makes eventually sense is a second versioning system, besides the lead. For example:
0.16.1 <=> 1601
0.16.56 <=> 1656
0.17.1 <=> 1701
0.17.9 <=> 1709
Just the most simplest example I can think about.
Nothing more needs to be said but: Inform yourself why such standards exists and why this is a bad idea.
What can be talked about and which makes eventually sense is a second versioning system, besides the lead. For example:
0.16.1 <=> 1601
0.16.56 <=> 1656
0.17.1 <=> 1701
0.17.9 <=> 1709
Just the most simplest example I can think about.
Cool suggestion: Eatable MOUSE-pointers.
Have you used the Advanced Search today?
Need help, question? FAQ - Wiki - Forum help
I still like small signatures...
Have you used the Advanced Search today?
Need help, question? FAQ - Wiki - Forum help
I still like small signatures...
Re: Change Factorio's numeric versionning system
Do you really believe that we will not see 0.17.100?))
-
- Long Handed Inserter
- Posts: 59
- Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2018 8:19 am
- Contact:
Re: Change Factorio's numeric versionning system
I don't see any problems with current public version string. Frankly, devs could mark new versions by increasing amounts of zeroes in version string and I would be still ok with it.
But, i do hope that developers will start numbering moding API versions separately. While vast majority of mods depends on both content and API the changes in last usually much worse to detect and deal with, so separate version stream for modding API can solve a lot of ambiguity around mod compatibility with future Factorio versions.
But, i do hope that developers will start numbering moding API versions separately. While vast majority of mods depends on both content and API the changes in last usually much worse to detect and deal with, so separate version stream for modding API can solve a lot of ambiguity around mod compatibility with future Factorio versions.
- BlueTemplar
- Smart Inserter
- Posts: 3133
- Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2018 2:16 pm
- Contact:
Re: Change Factorio's numeric versionning system
I've settled on 017.xx.yy for my mods. (Hopefully the leading 0 won't pose any issue...)
I was aware of any file manager that could handle it, or even why it should, considering that we're getting into semantic meaning territory here (and a way more tricky one than capitalization ordering) - NN.NN.NN, and especially NN.NN in filename has no guarantees of being a version number !StahnAileron wrote: ↑Tue Mar 12, 2019 4:28 am If that's the case, you're better off asking Steam to fix it on their end by implementing natural sorting so EVERYONE who uses Steam, Dev and players, benefits. I know my file manager (Total Commander) can handle it and I'm pretty sure modern Windows (and other OSes?) can handle it too. I don't see why Steam can't bother with it.
BobDiggity (mod-scenario-pack)
Re: Change Factorio's numeric versionning system
The only problem I have with current version format is a leading 0 . Public version can't be 0.* . I hate this "eternal alpha" thing. Game was done and released once it was published in Steam. It's absolutely ok to develop released game. Future 1.0 must be 2.0 actually. What kind of insanity with this "it's aaaaaaalpha", "early a-a-access". That's just stupid.
- BlueTemplar
- Smart Inserter
- Posts: 3133
- Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2018 2:16 pm
- Contact:
Re: Change Factorio's numeric versionning system
No, it's not, it allows for willing guinea pigs like us to help to make a much better game than would otherwise be possible ?
(I guess that part of the issue is that standards for 1.0 games are much higher these days?)
Heck, without the crowdfunders, that took an even bigger risk, Factorio would have never been released in the first place !
(I guess that part of the issue is that standards for 1.0 games are much higher these days?)
Heck, without the crowdfunders, that took an even bigger risk, Factorio would have never been released in the first place !
BobDiggity (mod-scenario-pack)
Re: Change Factorio's numeric versionning system
EA, crowdfunding, and in general releasing stuff as Alpha comes with goods and bads. Factorio is a great example of the good that can come from it. But I can point to more than one project that I've crowd funded that never made it. I'm also not mad about those projects. Sad maybe, but they appear to have put forth honest effort and I still continue to occasionally fund stuff.
Factorio, even in it's 0.17 version is not a finished product, though once it's debugged 0.17 could probably pass as a finished product. The level of polish we're seeing is getting really impressive. In the end, it's a developer's choice when denote a product as meeting their '1.0' standard. There's no good reason to force a developer to slap a '1.x' label on something just because it's available to the general public. It's actually beneficial to keep the 0.x label, as most people recognize this as meaning 'incomplete product'.
Factorio, even in it's 0.17 version is not a finished product, though once it's debugged 0.17 could probably pass as a finished product. The level of polish we're seeing is getting really impressive. In the end, it's a developer's choice when denote a product as meeting their '1.0' standard. There's no good reason to force a developer to slap a '1.x' label on something just because it's available to the general public. It's actually beneficial to keep the 0.x label, as most people recognize this as meaning 'incomplete product'.
Re: Change Factorio's numeric versionning system
This is how many games do it, including minecraft for example. How should they do the version numbers istead?
- BlueTemplar
- Smart Inserter
- Posts: 3133
- Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2018 2:16 pm
- Contact:
Re: Change Factorio's numeric versionning system
I'm also reminded of an ambitious game that crashed and burned badly... I'll always wonder if that would still have happened if Early Access was something available at the time !
BobDiggity (mod-scenario-pack)
Re: Change Factorio's numeric versionning system
And what is a "finished product"? Do you think 1.0 will be the last version? Look at Stellaris - game was totally reworked multiple times during several years !after! release. Each time it was a new major version. And it's totally normal. Nothing ever is finished. This "not done yet" paranoia is dangerous.
Re: Change Factorio's numeric versionning system
"Not done yet" paranoia *can be* dangerous, but refusing to allow devs to indicate that they don't believe their product is up to their release standards is depriving them of a valuable tool. It's a tool, nothing more nothing less. Like most tools, it can be abused and misused. But developers have the option to make the call on when they believe a game is ready to be made 1.0. A good general bunchmark is 'If we did no further modifications to this game, we believe we'd be happy with the product we put out.' but each company will honestly have their own benchmark and mine isn't a good universal fit.leadraven wrote: ↑Tue Mar 19, 2019 7:17 amAnd what is a "finished product"? Do you think 1.0 will be the last version? Look at Stellaris - game was totally reworked multiple times during several years !after! release. Each time it was a new major version. And it's totally normal. Nothing ever is finished. This "not done yet" paranoia is dangerous.
There are games that have been released that I don't think should have been, even some that I've enjoyed playing. A game that I played recently and really enjoyed, subnautica, I don't think was ready for release when it was pushed into it's 1.0 version. It's obvious playing through the game that the first half has a tremendous amount of polish and there were all sorts of things that they hinted at... that just never came to fruition or were massively underutilized to the point where it feels obvious to me that they intended more of them... but it got pushed out the door and the developers put the 1.0 label on it and left it mostly as-was. Even so, I'll encourage people to buy it... but there's still that mild frustration that there were all these cool things that it's very obvious they wanted to originally do that... just never happened.