# Version Names

**URL:** <https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/version-names/4145>\
**Category:** Ignition\
**Created:** [March 14, 2012, 3:20am UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/version-names/4145 "2012-03-14T03:20:02Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Curlyandshemp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/bcef8e/32.png) [@Curlyandshemp](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/Curlyandshemp)\
**Post date:** [March 14, 2012, 3:20am UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/version-names/4145/1 "2012-03-14T03:20:02Z")

</div>

how about dropping the version numbering scheme and adopt an Android like naming convention for versions?

Right now I am using Ignition Bobby. I hear Version Travis has some outstanding features, but Version Vannessa will knock your socks off!

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Automate](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/51bf81/32.png) [@Automate](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/Automate)\
**Post date:** [March 14, 2012, 12:01pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/version-names/4145/2 "2012-03-14T12:01:14Z")

</div>

-1 if we are voting

Why would would want to trade a logical naming convention for one that’s not?  
How do you know if a version is a major or only a minor upgrade?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![nathan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/c5a1d2/32.png) [@nathan](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/nathan)\
**Post date:** [March 14, 2012, 12:48pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/version-names/4145/3 "2012-03-14T12:48:00Z")

</div>

For the record, I’m indifferent.

Typically the versions numbers go (major).(minor).(revision). Android uses an alphabetized code word, using deserts, for each version (minor, using my notation). From Wikipedia:

v2.0/2.1 (Eclair)  
v2.0  
v2.0.1  
v2.1  
v2.2.x (Froyo)  
v2.2  
v2.2.1  
v2.2.2  
v2.2.3  
v2.3.x (Gingerbread)  
v2.3  
v2.3.3  
v2.3.4  
v2.3.5  
v2.3.6  
v2.3.7  
v3.x (Honeycomb)  
v3.0  
v3.1  
v3.2  
v3.2.1  
v3.2.2  
v3.2.4  
v3.2.6  
v4.x (Ice Cream Sandwich)  
v4.0.1  
v4.0.2  
v4.0.3

[quote=“Automate”]-1 if we are voting

Why would would want to trade a logical naming convention for one that’s not?  
How do you know if a version is a major or only a minor upgrade?[/quote]