[pfowler]

I've been digging around the forums, here and RIM, as well as KB articles and haven't found any definitive answer. What is the acceptable format for software version numbers?

We've released every release of our product in "major.minor.revision" (1.2.3) format. While working closely with a customer who was experiencing problems, I began using "major.minor.revision.build" (1.2.3.1001) format. This worked fine while doing an OTA download from our web server, but once placed on the BES for distribution, it resulted in "invalid device state" for a couple of devices, and RIM's dragged their feet in helping to resolve the situation.

Which - leads to the customer yelling at us for being so stupid... awesome!

Can anyone point me to a document that specifies exactly how version numbers should be formatted - especially for OTA push installations on the BES?

[hrbuckley]

I've been using major.minor.revision.build format for a while and have used them for BES distribution as well. In my case though I didn't have major.minor.revision already distributed.

Not sure what that means but maybe if you can get all your apps back to the same format you will be the hero again.

[pfowler]

Yeah - 4 positions seems to be the standard. The screwup was that we (I) gave out a BES distribution without rolling the 3rd digit. The annoying thing is that I was intentionally not rolling the version because I expected to distribute a few builds before they got the final. Eg: Final version was going to be 1.0.5, the version they had was 1.0.0, and I gave them 1.0.0.1234

Question stands: does RIM have an official doc on this?

[hrbuckley]

Originally Posted by pfowler

Question stands: does RIM have an official doc on this?

A very good question. I've never seen anything official or indeed anything saying you need numbers. Maybe I'll release a John.Paul.George.Ringo version of something ;)

[hdawg]

either major.minor.revision.build or major.minor.build is acceptable.

RIM's minors have been more major (4.0 -> 4.1 comes to mind) ... but based on how SPs and MRs are released I'd stick with major.minor.revision.build

[penguin3107]

Originally Posted by hdawg

either major.minor.revision.build or major.minor.build is acceptable.

RIM's minors have been more major (4.0 -> 4.1 comes to mind) ... but based on how SPs and MRs are released I'd stick with major.minor.revision.build

But stick with 3 digits for each (aaa.bbb.ccc.ddd), if you want to want to deploy via BES 5.
BES 5 currently has trouble with 4+ digits. For example:
Deploy Rove Mobile Admin client from BES - Port3101.org : Your BES Connection

[hrbuckley]

Thanks penguin3107, good to know.