Question about version numbers

Discussion in 'Mac Apps and Mac App Store' started by mac-er, Mar 24, 2005.

  1. mac-er macrumors 65816

    Apr 9, 2003
    I always thought 'point' software updates (as in 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, etc) were for very minor upgrades or fixes.

    Is Apple just using the whole 10.3, 10.4, 10.5, etc because they don't want to stop using the whole 'X' thing? I have just always thought that it seems like a lot of upgrades/changes just to bump up the version number by a tenth.

    What exactly would have to change for Apple to start using Version 11?
  2. PlaceofDis macrumors Core

    Jan 6, 2004
    to move to Version 11, apple would have to do a HUGE almost completely re-write type of change to the OS

    the 10.1 .2 .3 etc are major updates as well, just not complete system rewrite

    apple uses 10.3.1, 10.3.2 as the minor updates, currently we are on 10.3.8 so its the eight update to 10.3
  3. Westside guy macrumors 603

    Westside guy

    Oct 15, 2003
    The soggy side of the Pacific NW
    And then to confuse things further...

    A lot of open-source software - the sort of thing you find in fink, some of which does get ported to use Aqua natively instead of X11 - uses a different scheme. The first number is the major revision, like you'd expect, and the second number is still the minor revision. BUT if the minor revision is an even number (.0, .2, etc.) it is part of the "stable" release set, while odd minor numbers (.1, .3, and so on) are considered unstable "testing" trees - pre-releases for the future stable release that will have the next even number up.

    So for example Gimp 2.0.2 would be considered a stable release; while Gimp 2.1.4 would be an unstable development release, focused on getting new features working for the eventual 2.2.x stable releases.

    I think this practice started with the Linux kernel, but I could be wrong. In any case many (but not all) open-source software projects follow this scheme.

Share This Page