Topic: Map versioning?

[TerraEsperZ]

Here's something that's been going around in my mind over the last couple weeks. Should I use versioning in my maps?

At first, the question might seem silly. We're not talking about something major like software where newer versions might add or remove features and correct bugs. Still, simply using the month and year to denote when a map has been altered doesn't feel satisfying anymore.

I've been thinking of adding a version number, something relatively simple like "Major.Minor.Patch", with a major version number (only changed if I redo a game completely in a visually different way), a minor version number for cosmetic alterations or format changes (deciding to present information differently), and a patch number for corrections and fixes.

Now, I've never had to handle versioning. While newer maps would start with a v1.0.0 right off the bat, I'm not sure how I'd handle existing maps for incomplete projects. Should I start them at v1.0.0 if I don'y remember how many times I've changed them? Also, I'd prefer to avoid JonLeung being pissed at me for having him re-upload a whole bunch of maps just to add a version number.

I'm not really looking for confirmation or anything, just your comments and thoughts on the subject.

[Revned]

I've been including revision numbers on most of my maps lately (r2, r3, r4, etc.), so I'd say go for it. I prefer just bumping a revision number each time rather than trying to come up with a reasonable version number, but that's just semantics.

The real reason I started doing it is because I noticed that many of my maps were floating around the internet, and it was unclear which ones were actually up-to-date. I don't mind that they're reposted, but I want viewers to be able to figure out that I've revised them.

I didn't bother to go back and add revision numbers to old maps; I've just been adding them when I'm already making changes.

[Trop]

I originally put version numbers on my maps but I don't do it anymore.  Version numbers are really for programmers so they can go back if they made a mistake in the code.  Version numbers of images don't mean much since you won't be publishing revision after revision of the same image the way you would software.

[JonLeung]

That's a good point.  Ideally you shouldn't have to go back and fix stuff constantly.

Yes, I always prefer a better map, so no one should be afraid to resend in maps.  However, obviously I would prefer not to do it like five or six times for the same one.

If you must do versioning numbers, I think using the date directly or somehow deriving it from it is the best way to go.  If you see a version of your map and it is a "v2014.05.27" and you know offhand that you definitely updated it this calendar year then you know you can expect to find a "v2016.xx.xx" in your work files and can send that in.  If you see the same map and it's "v3.0" then isn't it a bit harder to remember if that's the latest one, would you really remember if you have a "v3.1" or "v4.0"?

Systematic is more practical than arbitrarily sequential.

[Revned]

I don't use them for my own organization at all - for that, I switched to full-blown version control. As mentioned, I do it because I can't control where or when my maps are reposted elsewhere, and I want to give some explicit indication that the ones here on VGMaps might be newer.

[TerraEsperZ]

Like I said (or should have said?), I just find the idea of versions cool. Some of it I think stems from cartoons and shows where robots, weapons and vehicles would often be replaced by superior iterations denoted by having a "version 2" or "mark III" after the name. Heck, I love the idea of the Iron Man armours in the Marvel Cinematic Universe even if the several dozens of new armours in the third movie weren't actual iterations of the same model but a whole bunch of specialized armours with distinct functions.

I fully agree that using the full date instead of just the month as I've done would be best. In retrospect, I wish I'd kept previous versions of final maps that were replaced if only to be able to see the progression in design as time went by. So yeah, actual version numbers don't make sense.

It still sounds cool though .