Reason behind Version and Build Numbers

[galfert]

What is the reason for both version and build numbers?

Seems redundant if every point version number increase is also a build number increment.

Therefore when speaking about one's Cumulus MX version is it necessary to mention both the version and build number?...or would either suffice?

Seems like often you see people post using just one or the other. This can be detrimental to searching to see if others have the same problem as you with a given update.

It is my understanding that normally with software a build number can increase but the version number does not. But if in practice there is never more than one build for a given version number then it seems redundant, no? Normally build numbers are more of an internal development thing and then you release a final build to become a new version. Therefore typically the end user should have no clue about build number and only concern themselves with version numbers.

[HansR]

Therefore typically the end user should have no clue about build number and only concern themselves with version numbers.

I agree. But since the build number is in the archive name it would be best to only use the build number. It is good enough for CMX, it functions as version number.

[mcrossley]

Partly the lack of an automated build, part laziness on my part - only incrementing the build number once, really I should increment it for each test version released. Many builds do not go to test so the increment would be 1:1 for those anyway.