Why doesn't vBulletin use 3.2 instead then?

[Gary King]

Why doesn't vBulletin use 3.2 instead then? It says no 3.1 because of lots of changes, which I still find kind of amusing anyways. I mean, doesn't matter what you are releasing, even if it has lots of changes, so they should still name it 3.1

People will be like 'do I have to upgrade ALL those versions to get to 3.5' etc.

[cirisme]

Marketing. It's stupid, yes.

[Matthew Gordon]

Skipping numbers happen all the time. Personally, since there are major changes (and backwards compatibility with hacks is scratched) I think 3.5 fits.

[Floris]

We have decided to name this new version '3.5.0' rather than '3.1.0' because the code contains some rather fundamental changes at a core level in order to support some of the new features we have implemented, some of which I will describe briefly here.

That works for me

[Gary King]

Not for the many that quickly become confused.

I can just imagine the chaos on these forums...

"WTF [email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]!! Why does VBulletin Board hve so many bugs?!?!?? They rlsed v3.5 already and im only running v3.07?#%@!!!!!!!! OMG!!!"

Please note that the quote above does not represent my own thoughts, only what I predict we will see a lot of on these forums. It's just a small example.

Also, yes Floris, I had already read that portion. I was criticizing it, too. I don't see why, even with so many new features, etc., that they would skip several versions. The only other time I have actually see this happen with a product was when Winamp moved from v3 to v5 - mostly because v3 was complete garbage, so their whole marketing scheme was to say that v5 included 'the best of both worlds - v2 and v3! Wow!'.

[JPT62089]

version numbers really shouldnt matter. Its the quality of the software and the features also ease of use. just like with games! graphics dont matter in the long run but gameplay and controls do!

[Gary King]

I'm not here to rant and scream, just to say something like 'What the heck are they doing?'

If everyone did this kind of version jumping, imagine what a chaotic world we would live in Especially in the business-level.

Would be fun...

[David Gonzalez]

I don't think they did it for "fun", they only displayed some of the features that will change vB core more, as far as i know they having some critical changes in the template and integrating some other features to it, so in my opinion i guess it was a good idea to choose 3.5.0

[Wayne Luke]

If everyone did this kind of version jumping, imagine what a chaotic world we would live in Especially in the business-level.

Microsoft Access 2.0's successor was Access 6.0
Microsoft Publisher 2.0's successor was Publisher 7.0
Microsoft Office applications now have a version of 11 even though the previous version was 9.X, except on the Mac.

Netscape Internet Browser went from 4.X to 6.0

Jumping version numbers is actually quite common in software development. Version numbers are completely arbitrary to the developer and the internal system they use. Most developers use them to signify major steps forward. This is what we did. There are a lot of core changes in vBulletin 3.5 that warrent such a large increase.

[Joseph777]

I'm down with whatever Kier says!

Even the fact that "my disco needs me!"

[fire27]

i think instead of using decimal ver #'s you should switch to binary

[Mike Sullivan]

i think instead of using decimal ver #'s you should switch to binary

But the jump from 10 to 11 doesn't seem as big as from 1 to 10!

[Mainer82]

i think instead of using decimal ver #'s you should switch to binary

Actually it should be like vBulletin XP, or vBulletin Blackcombe.

[akex054]

By changing the version number from 3.0.x to 3.5 you are then limited if you include too many new features.

Imagine, a new version is out with more new features than the 3.5 but still using the 3.x scheme. You can't go over 3.9 as 3.10 is like 3.1.O aso ...

[Zachery]

Sure you can. 3.10.1 3.10.2 3.10.3

3.99.1 works fine