![]() Managing versions becomes then a full-time job (sometimes called a data manager - this is Ubisoft terminology, probably called differently elsewhere), the labeling scheme is then much more complex and highly dependant on the actual game being made. You'll have several platforms, SKUs, languages, single-player mode, multi-player mode, etc. Some builds will be promoted to a milestone after QA: alpha, beta, release candidate, and labelled as such.įor big projects, the simple concept of a "game version" doesn't apply anymore. In this case, having both an atomic change number and a version number is redundant and error prone. Revision is any change made (bug fixes, small updates) Build number (normally an auto increment if used) In your example (1.7.1.0): Major version 1. This is particularly useful for a middle-scale project where everything (code & assets) is stored on the same repository, and continuous integration is in place. Where: Major is a major update to the software. It is much more common to refer to a build by its atomic change ID (e.g. It'as also used in pre-release customer versions such as private or open betas.įor games in development I've rarely seen this system used. I have never seen this before with the earlier versions of npm I have used, and I cannot find any documentation for this notation, only for the notations I'm already familiar with, e.g. 1.0 will typically be the gold master, and patches will start from there: 1.1, 1.2. I recently ran npm install (npm 1.4.3) with the -save-dev flag and the package entries it added to my package.json all began with a, e.g. That said, the scheme you mentioned is quite common for released games. The most important thing is not the actual convention, but the fact that everyone sticks to it. Practice will vary depending on companies, teams and projects: there is no such thing as a best practice. If you make lists of the features that will need to be implemented before each increment, you'll also have a plan to follow, but in the end it's your decision as to what fits into each category.Īs far as I know, there is no standard for that. For example, if you're incrementing the minor build number, the revision and package both reset to 0.Įven though the categories are defined, there's still ambiguity for what kind of features actually cross over between a revision and a minor build number. Package: Your code stays the same, external library changes or asset file update.Ĭombined changes roll over to the most significant change. Revision: Minor alterations on existing features, small bug fixes, etc. Minor build number: Used for feature updates, large bug fixes etc. Major build number: This indicates a major milestone in the game, increment this when going from beta to release, from release to major updates. I worked for a company that essentially broke it down like this: There is no standard, but you should do it in a way that makes sense to you and contains all the information you may need to track that build.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |