Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 2 1 2
NLS #106567 07/21/16 07:23 PM
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 807
Likes: 3
D
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
D
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 807
Likes: 3
I would've done it this way. MAME 07-21-2016 or MAME 07212016 Screw the version numbers. smile


W11 Home 64-bit + Nobara OS / AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT / AMD Ryzen 7 3700X 8-Core 3.59 GHz / RAM 64 GB
NLS #106568 07/21/16 08:07 PM
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 387
E
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
E
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 387
Mame v1.0 will come out when every single electronic device ever conceived by man is emulated perfectly.

Don't hold your breath.

Last edited by EoceneMiacid; 07/21/16 08:08 PM.
NLS #106620 07/25/16 02:32 PM
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 55
N
NLS Offline OP
Member
OP Offline
Member
N
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 55
Haze indeed that would be interesting.
MAME 2.0.
Since it didn't happen, then release number would be enough to be used a version number (in other words indeed to drop "0.").

Going for a date version (as Dullaron suggests), although I personally do it in my own projects (but YYMMDD so there is proper sorting), I don't think it fits MAME.

Going for "MAME 176" makes more sense.

While the explanation that "1.0 represents all electronic devices, even those not yet made" also has a point, this thing probably started for other reasons. That nobody bothered to classify major (to change main version) and minor (to change dot version) changes (so something like MAME 12.45), or even MAME 3.23.12 (milestones/generation changes, major updates, minor updates) or even still include .build number like many projects do, AFTER the version numbers (3.23.12.0175).

This would make the project way more understandable to people that don't follow the project every month. I mean I cannot count the times I explained that between two simple version steps, MAME became from an arcade-only emulator an "everything" emulator. Or when it switched from DOS to Win (and people still tried to run it otherwise), or when it completely switched video subsystem. All this would be more "readable" by more casual users if proper versioning was used.

But all this talk is just casual of course.

Anyway history cannot be unwritten.

If I could propose something, I would just propose some time to move to the simple "drop 0." era.
After all MAME versioning changed so many times already.

Last edited by NLS; 07/25/16 02:34 PM.
NLS #106621 07/25/16 02:40 PM
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 4,930
Likes: 24
Q
Very Senior Member
Offline
Very Senior Member
Q
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 4,930
Likes: 24
The "0." in open source software projects is actually a *wanted* understatement in most cases (that's true for my own projects at least). The number behind it is just the consecutive release number. There's no need for a 1.0, 2.0 or whatever - it has no additional meaning.


A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work unless it's open. [Frank Zappa]
NLS #106625 07/25/16 05:43 PM
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 17,146
Likes: 179
R
Very Senior Member
Offline
Very Senior Member
R
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 17,146
Likes: 179
If you ignore the "0." you get linear progress through time, which the entirety of the number part's meaning we want to convey. But the 0. is important too, for meaning "not finished".

Page 2 of 2 1 2

Link Copied to Clipboard
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 93 guests, and 0 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
ShoutChat
Comment Guidelines: Do post respectful and insightful comments. Don't flame, hate, spam.
Forum Statistics
Forums9
Topics9,285
Posts121,462
Members5,064
Most Online1,283
Dec 21st, 2022
Our Sponsor
These forums are sponsored by Superior Solitaire, an ad-free card game collection for macOS and iOS. Download it today!

Superior Solitaire
Forum hosted by www.retrogamesformac.com