Timeline for Are there any drawbacks to the Major.Minor.YMDD.Build version strategy?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 14, 2011 at 20:53 | vote | accept | Chu | ||
| Jul 12, 2011 at 13:23 | comment | added | Aether | Other potential 5-digit alternatives could include YYDDD or YYWWD. | |
| Jul 7, 2011 at 22:15 | comment | added | Péter Török | @Chu, in that case, a third (release) version number is (a potential) winner, being way shorter than a date in any format. | |
| Jul 7, 2011 at 21:43 | comment | added | configurator | I'd suggest hex just for the month, and use YYMDD - e.g. for 2012-12-12 you'd use 12C12. | |
| Jul 7, 2011 at 15:44 | comment | added | FrustratedWithFormsDesigner | @Chu: If you want to minimize the size of the string, encode it in hex. 20110707 becomes 132DD73, or 2011-07-07 becomes 7DB-7-07 (the "month" digit doesn't need left-padding because it will only ever be 1 digit long) if you convert the date pieces separately. It's much less intelligible, but it will take less time for people on the phone to say it. | |
| Jul 7, 2011 at 15:37 | comment | added | Chu | Thanks for the suggestion. I wondered about YYYYMMDD (or even YYMMDD) but that's going to be the major portion that changes for our customers. So when communicating, we'll almost always be asking "Hey what version is the customer on" - minimizing that mouthful is somewhat important for us. :) | |
| Jul 7, 2011 at 15:21 | history | edited | Péter Török | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 270 characters in body |
| Jul 7, 2011 at 15:13 | history | answered | Péter Török | CC BY-SA 3.0 |