08-06-09, 04:43 PM | #21 | |||
A solid versioning standard doesn't just help users upgrade, it helps authors keep their AddOn organised, as well. Authors that whine about something as simple as standardising a version number need slapped with an old UNIX manual; they annoy me in the world of AddOns just as much as they annoy me in the outside development world. :P Someone gave a good example, earlier in the thread: "Windows Vista" is a codename/nickname; 6.1 is a version. Loads of companies and coders give their 'products' nifty codenames... but they also give them a numerical version identifier. AddOn authors need to grasp just why that's a good thing. But they won't start unless someone requires it of them. "We shouldn't enforce it because lots of authors will throw their toys out of their prams!" is not a good reason, ever, to avoid doing it.
|
||||
08-06-09, 11:35 PM | #22 | |
For one who apparently has so much programming experience, Myrathi, I would expect to see some decent addons from you. But you haven't uploaded one? Not even a tiny utility?
Unfortunately, programmers *ARE* lazy. That's part of why we become programmers. The people that aren't lazy, they are perfectly content to highlight the same word in every line of a text document and type in a different word. The programmers are the ones that are too lazy to do something as tedious as that, so we write the kinds of tools that automate that. This same laziness is what begat the addon auto-updater in the first place. Maybe in the world you live in, end users have the power to decapitate the programmers that do things they don't like. You sound like you believe this when you said earlier "they're only shooting themselves in the foot by making the life of their users harder." However, in this world, the users are not in control. The programmer is lazy, decides to find some way to automate a task with an addon, and then decides to share it with others out of the goodness of his heart. No addon author owes anything to someone who downloads it, even if they develop a sense of loyalty to that programmer for a job well done.
Frankly, you don't sound like you have any experience in the real world of programming, I don't believe you can code half as well as you sound like you think you can, and your arguments are riddled with sweeping generalizations and unfounded biases. I hope Minion development does not follow in anything resembling the direction you are trying to point out to it. |
||
08-07-09, 08:09 AM | #23 | |||||||
Firstly, apologies to others for the wall of text.
Automating upgrades of a piece of software based on "current version" is, quite simply, aided immensely by version numbering, in some way, shape or form. Versioning - and version control - are well-proven methods in more areas of expertise than just programming. It works. Simple as that. So what, exactly, do you have against the process because, thus far, all you've done is put your metaphorical foot in the way? Just because you're lazy and can't be bothered following a standard doesn't make the standard wrong. It means you're lazy and a block to everyone else that might actually want to make things work more fluidly. Congratulations on being the stereotypical spanner in the works. Idea-juggling is good. Discussions are good. Flaming is a pointless waste of time and effort.
Here's a suggestion: try being constructive in your criticism, next time. High-and-mighty flame attempts just make you sound whiny; they don't actually achieve anything useful. Sure, I could perhaps have worded some of my post better but all your flame did was antagonise for absolutely no gain, whatsoever. I also find it highly amusing - and rather ironic - that you're already effectively using the versioning format I gave as an example, in my previous post (albeit with a 'v' prefix), for all of your uploaded AddOns. Yet you feel the need to flame and say I'm the one being counter-productive, here? Definitely amusing. So. Back to the topic at hand: what exactly do you have against standardised version formatting? (besides the fact that you're lazy, of course - that's not a good reason) |
||||||||
08-07-09, 12:25 PM | #24 | |
Addon authors don't get paid anyway, in any real terms. It's basically a hobby, nothing more. Authors write something because they, personally, want to use it. Sometimes they're nice and share it. But if the process of sharing it becomes too difficult in their eyes, they'll just stop sharing. |
||
08-07-09, 12:56 PM | #25 |
the root of the problem, it seems to me, is that wowinterface is hosting out-of-date addons. it's not their fault or anything -- i know my mods here tend to lag behind curse because i develop over there and move "stable" versions over here after i'm happy with them. i suspect other folks have all sorts of reasons why they don't update their mods to all sites at the same time.
anyway, if minion had a feedback feature where people could flag a mod as being out-of-date that info could be used by minion to ignore a mod, but also it could be sent back to wowi and wowi could email mod authors of out-of-date mods to ask them to update or acknowledge the mod is indeed out-of-date. if they update, then everybody's happy. if they acknowledge the mod is out-of-date, then it gets flagged as such at the wowi level and all minion updates will ignore it unless specifically told to download it. |
|
08-07-09, 01:48 PM | #26 |
I've seen lots and lots of arguments here, and frankly, it's all quite silly.
It is not WoWInterfaces place to tell me how to version my addons If they want to keep and incremental version number, that's up to them, but when I come up with my versioning scheme it's because it is what I think is best for me and my project. Now the most common one I see is people pushing for a major.minor.revision format. Ok... pretty standard. But wait? Are these integers? Decimals? It matters! Which is greater? 1.1.11? Or 1.1.2? The uneducated user will most likely think 1.1.2 is the newer version. Yet, in my case (with a few exceptions) it's actually 9 versions behind. Note: this is an even bigger problem if you do a major.minor, and I think it's bad practice to release revisions as anything other than a beta, if it's worth a new version, it's worth a new minor. So which of these do I select? Well it depends... if computer savvy types are going to be the primary users, I probably release version 1.1, then 1.2, then 1.3. If it's going to be largely uneducated users... well then I go with 1.001, 1.002 and figure if I got through 999 minors it's time for a major bump anyway. The point is, there are many correct and sane versioning schemes, a different reasons for choosing them (which is why there is no universal standard). Claiming that WoWIinterface can come up with one that is the best for every project is pure silliness. Users need to pay attention to what Minion is doing. If you have an addon that is updated more frequently at Curse than WoWI.... well that's what the Ignore button is for. (Yes, you can use "Update All" after ignoring the addon in question... it's very clever like that) Last edited by Vyper : 08-07-09 at 01:52 PM. |
|
08-08-09, 01:33 PM | #27 | |||||
Authors must already enter in a version string when they upload their addon. It's something they already do. There is no extra step they must or must not take. What I was suggesting was that the format of that version string be standardised. I was only suggesting a format, though, not stating that's the one it should be. There are many reasons that one version-format may be better than another yet not be a good one to use as a site-format. The other version-format that may be better for use on a site for progress-tracking would be a revision-number. Both are version-formats, one just happens to be no more than an incremental integer. This is not a major step for authors, though. It's not even a major step for users (except, perhaps, in that they'll have a more across-the-board method of recognising revisions). It "simply" means that authors will need to type a string of a specific format. Ain't exactly rocket science - though from certain people's reactions, you'd think it was.
Note that the tag I suggested was "X-Minion-Version" and not "Version" (which is generally always used as the tag to identify the *addon* version, in the style the author prefers). I chose a Minion-specific tag quite deliberately. :)
At the very least, it reminded me of one very important rule, when it comes to users: never, ever assume that they're going react in any specific way; they have a habit of screwing you up. :D
Last edited by Myrathi : 08-08-09 at 01:36 PM. Reason: added lilsparky response. |
||||||
08-08-09, 02:13 PM | #28 |
Okay I am not an addon author, I am simply an addon and Minion user who just took the time to read through this entire thread. I think my slight coding background has allowed me to follow the problems involved closely enough to understand all of the arguments on the table. But I think it is important to identify myself as a user before I say anything else.
Personally, I think if you're going to do something than do it right. We all waited for Minion's release like crack fiends and now it is finally out and in "beta". However, we have only see 1 update release during the beta and there are obviously still a lot of problems with it. Now I am grateful for having Minion and the time that Shirik and others put into it, but I think that the project obviously isn't done. It scares me that the words used about fixing problems is they might be fixed in a "future release". Now the words future release make it sound quite a way off, maybe this is completely untrue, but the wording gives off that feel. We can't have an update program that doesn't know what files are updates and which are old. Period. However, the reason that Minon is in this current state is because of the varied versioning systems that addon authors use. So it is a complex problem and I am aware that Shirik sorta has his hands tied. So let me say that as a user I represent a big portion of the user base that wants a working automatic addon updater. I would think that this would stop the groveling over versioning systems. The arguments I have seen from addon authors in this thread so far have seem quite selfish. Because the argument is that a standardized form of versioning would eliminate the current problem and some of you are still not willing to make the change. If you want to use your own version numbers, etc. Then make a spreadsheet on your comp that lists your version numbers next to the standardized version numbers. And when you upload use the standardized. Now, I know some people might reply to this and be like wow you jerk, these guys are doing this for little or no money, and in most cases the latter. So cut them some slack. But honestly, I do. I don't complain very often. But I had to say something on this issue because the only argument for using your own versioning system over a standardized one when releasing something to the public is that you are OCD or lazy as the you know what. Please guys I found this on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_versioning See if the community can't come up with something that is more standard. |
|
08-08-09, 03:34 PM | #29 |
To the remarks of addon authors being lazy for not using, or not wanting to use, a standardized versioning system... for an automatic updater... wow.
So when someone doesn't do, or shows lack of interest to do, something to make it effortless for others to update his code... that makes them lazy? They write all the code, fix bugs that they themselves don't get, bend over backwards, touch their toes, kiss your ... So they're lazy, it is their choice after all, isn't it? Edit: I'm not saying that using a version system is bad, good, or ugly. I think it could fix a ton of issues. I just think that calling addon authors lazy here, is just extremely bad form, when used in the context of an auto updater program. Last edited by Yhor : 08-08-09 at 03:37 PM. |
|
08-08-09, 04:34 PM | #30 | |
|
||
08-08-09, 04:50 PM | #31 |
a versioning consistency standard misses a major issue -- it doesn't address the addons that are already present here at wowinterface. who's gonna go back and change all the version numbers of all the addons here?
if you expect that the original authors will stop by to do this, then why wouldn't they simply update the addons to be the latest version? if you expect the managers of the site to do it, again why not just assume they'd also feel free to copy the latest version from curse or where-ever. |
|
08-08-09, 05:28 PM | #32 | |
Well then it's not Wowinterfaces place to make your addons update correctly in a timely fashion, you can figure out on your own.
Again, my original complaint was simply that, by default, minion will replace my updated addons with olders ones because it thinks they are the latest. A standard versioning system would just be a cool way to accomplish this. |
||
08-08-09, 05:50 PM | #33 | |
Not that I think there's any case for insisting on using arbitrary versioning schemes; but as a user, your choice is to either deal with the eccentric authors of such addons or not use those addons. There's no weight behind complaints that someone didn't release their addon exactly the way you want it to be. |
||
08-08-09, 06:54 PM | #34 |
Okay, a few things.
1) As someone who has zero say in how WoWI operates, I can assure you that that they will never ever enforce a versioning scheme on authors. 2) The addon community is much much larger than WoWI. Trying to establish a versioning scheme for "the community" is something that is easier said than done, even if it was a good idea in the first place. Who knows, maybe some day someone will pop up and offer a versioning scheme so awesome that every author starts using it universally. Maybe I'll wake up to a $50k "bank error in your favor" letter tomorrow, too. 3) Development on Minion has been slow - very slow. Yes, we have read every post made on these boards and every post that hit the bug tracker. I have heard and listened to pretty much everything said about it. We are fully aware of the current deficiencies, and as people who use it ourselves, we want to see it improved too. Do not think that because there have been very little improvements since launch that we are happy with the current state of things, or that we are blind to areas of possible improvements. 4) Many current problems are enhanced by authors not updating their addons on WoWI. I would classify this as a Minion problem, as any program which updates to an older version isn't exactly optimal (which is being nice). This is simply something that is going to have to be worked with. It goes both ways. There are addons on WoWI that are much more up to date than WoWI. Neither site is at fault, but rather the authors for not updating their addons in places where they have done so before. This is however, no excuse for Minion's current behavior. 'Updating' addons to an infinitely (or even slightly) older version is not something that should happen. 5) Thank you for those who have tried to help in this thread. I'll leave this thread unlocked, but please keep the following in mind: A) A unified cross-site ubiquitous versioning scheme is not something that is going to happen, for reasons too lengthy for me to write down. B) The Minion team IS listening - feedback welcome. Try your best not to rant too incredibly much. C) The world is not perfect.
__________________
<Thunder_Child> ah, nothing makes me think of WoW more than seeing 15 different addons telling me i dont know how to play <End> Well, I'm not an AddOn, but you don't know how to play -- <Iriel> does your 'therapy' involve pitchforks and boiling oil? Last edited by ScytheBlade1 : 08-08-09 at 06:59 PM. |
|
08-08-09, 07:16 PM | #35 |
Force authors to assign matching version numbers across all sites. If you can agree to block WM together, shouldn't be that hard to force version numbers either.
OR log addon update date and decide based on that info - it is extremely unlikely that addon author would upload version 2 on Curse and next day upload version 1 on WOWI - you can agree on using same updater data format I bet or respect other updaters. Last edited by Elhana : 08-08-09 at 07:21 PM. |
|
08-08-09, 07:28 PM | #36 |
It doesn't work that way.
__________________
<Thunder_Child> ah, nothing makes me think of WoW more than seeing 15 different addons telling me i dont know how to play <End> Well, I'm not an AddOn, but you don't know how to play -- <Iriel> does your 'therapy' involve pitchforks and boiling oil? |
|
08-08-09, 11:04 PM | #37 | |
They only way you'll properly enforce it would be for Blizzard to enforce it when getting to the Character screen. IE Addons not using the major.minor.revision version format don't get loaded in that screen And frankly I don't ever see them do that.
__________________
tuba_man on Apple test labs : "I imagine a brushed-aluminum room with a floor made of keyboards, each one plugged into a different test box somewhere. Someone is tasked with tossing a box full of cats (all wearing turtlenecks) into this room. If none of the systems catch fire within 30 minutes, testing is complete. Someone else must remove the cats. All have iPods." (http://community.livejournal.com/tec...t/2018070.html) |
||
08-09-09, 01:05 AM | #38 |
I know when i started making addons, it was all at the Old WoWAce site with the All-In-One SVN Repo.
I found it easy and neat to just use rev numbers for versioning. When we got move to the new forge system i started using basic numbers [ Major.minior.# ] (the 3rd feild is just an incrementing number usually single digit) . Anything that wasn't really a release got a rev number from svn. IMO Good authors make good addons and do things right. Good authors arn't stuborn people that decide to do WTF they want to do wtih labels, tags and version. They follow established methods that have been used for the 4+ years in wow moding. Social Problems don't need technical solutions, Users Vote with your feet, the rest will take care of itself.
__________________
"I was there in the beginning... and things were very different back then" --An Echo from a time before. |
|
08-09-09, 05:17 AM | #39 | |
if you produce something and don't give a damn about the people who use your product, your endeavour is not an altruistic one but just an ego trip to "put yourself out there. what we seem to have are programmers who bandy about the "we do this for you and you don't appreciate us" excuse for a mere, "i just want to see my name next to something so i can look accomplished. the botttom line is, are you writing something you can be proud of, or are you writing something to fill a gap within yourself? |
||
08-09-09, 06:10 AM | #40 |
If curse still had an rss feed for latest updated addon then you could do some guessing based on the date they were updated.
|
|
WoWInterface » Site Forums » Minion » Archive » Pretty disappointed... |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode |
Switch to Hybrid Mode |
Switch to Threaded Mode |
|
|