Re: Version Numbers

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> Hi Ken,
> 
> > would devise a system that was obscure yet trackable. Obscure in the
> > way that the customer doesn't immediate realise whether the software
> > is a major, minor, beta or alpha release.
> 
> Why would you want to conceal this information? (Not being
> argumentative; I really want to know).
> 
> I explicitly document firmware revision numbering systems precisely so
> that the end-user will understand what s/he is running. I don't want
> people assigning the same trust level to alpha/beta/special-build
> versions as to official releases.
> 
I can think of a few reasons to do so.  I agree about the trust level 
assigned to beta and other special releases, but there can be smaller 
releases that occur to change the way a function is implemented or to 
accomodate hardware changes.  While it is certainly necessary to be able 
to track those differences it may not be useful for the end user to know.  

Getting back units from the field that have to be cracked open to patch 
in circuitry and upgrade the firmware (maybe soldering and 
desoldering an EPROM) since the LED driver you had been using was 
obsoleted and had to be changed to a different one is at the very least a 
waste.  And it is likely to result in a less reliable unit rather than 
more.

I'm not sure that glossing over the change is the right way to approach 
this kind of change but I can understand why it would be done.  For that 
matter a lot of (most? all?) semiconductors companies reserve the right 
to "improve" their devices without notice and in practice some are better 
at keeping their customers informed about changes than others.

Robert