[Data-modeling] software versions/releases in the computer domain?

[Ed Laurent]

How about adding /release/ as a property of /release_series/ and reciprocate
it? This property would allow you to see and enter all the releases within a
series on each series' topic page.

The /software_release/ looks good to me.

I'm not sure what the major_number property on /release_series/ gets you.

At some point, software will need to be reciprocated with OS. Currently this
is done only for games (and files), and games are a type of software...

-Ed


On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 5:52 PM, brendan <brendan at metaweb.com> wrote:

>
> I've got some doubts about the hierarchical model. I've proposed 3
> levels:
>
> Software --> Major Release --> Minor Release
>
> The problem is: that middle level is pretty tenuous when you start to
> look at the actual data.  Internet Explorer 5 is a pretty broad
> bucket, it's something we talk about and it can be useful but what is
> it? There were 25 discrete versioned releases for windows. Some were
> only bundled with a particular Win OS or Office release.  Others could
> be installed on one of several Win OS's.  Then there's the Mac OS and
> Mac OS X release/versions which came out on completely different
> schedules.
>
> I think I prefer the direct connection between Software --> Software
> Release
>
> where the release has a unique version label and a unique release
> date; it's a discrete identifiable thing.
>
> here's a prototype example:
>
>
> http://sandbox.freebase.com/view/en/internet_explorer?domain=%2Fuser%2Fbrendan%2Fcomputer
>
> The "current version" question seems easily answered here: give me the
> version for my os/platform with the latest date. Some releases are for
> one platform,others for multiple platforms.  But the "version label"
> and "release date" are unique.
>
> And you can see that I attempted to model the "Major Version"
> *separately* and I call it "Release Series".
>
> thoughts?
>
> Brendan
>
>
>
> On Apr 29, 2008, at 1:09 PM, Faye Li wrote:
>
> > As much as I'm aware of the sometimes subjective use of "major" and
> > "minor" and a blurry line in between, I think versioning/release
> > information is extremely valuable, especially once we start inputting
> > more compatibility (software-software, software-hardware) data into
> > Freebase. I support a hierarchy in releases because compatibility data
> > demands it. So products just require Win XP, others specify required
> > individual weekly Windows updates. Since both major and minor releases
> > are specified in the real world, we need to support them.
> >
> > Topics have aliases, so alternate release names can be entered.
> > Photoshop CS3 is really Photoshop 9 (or something like that), but
> > Illustrator CS3 is Illustrator 12. I think aliases are perfect for
> > that.
> >
> > -- Faye
> >
> >
> > Tim Kientzle wrote:
> >> I like the idea of keeping the heirarchy here shallow and with a
> >> fixed
> >> number of levels:
> >>
> >> "Software Product"  -> "Major Software Release" -> "Release"
> >>
> >> Detailed modeling of major/minor/revision/bugfix is troublesome
> >> because there is so little consistency across products.  Open source
> >> packaging systems have major challenges just trying to consistently
> >> order versions (consider a product that switches to year-based
> >> version
> >> numbering then back again, so that 2.0 precedes 2006.0 precedes 5.4,
> >> not to mention ambiguous numbering such as "Solaris 7" which was
> >> really 2.7 except that the marketers decided to drop the '2'.)
> >>
> >> In fact, I'd be wary of using the words "Major" and "Minor" because
> >> they do carry a lot of baggage.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Apr 29, 2008, at 11:28 AM, brendan wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> hopefully your in-brain word wrap filter is in working order :(
> >>>
> >>> let me try that again:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> The "Major Software Release" type could have a property "Releases"
> >>> with an expected type "Software Release", so every actual versioned
> >>> release could have a topic
> >>>
> >>> e.g.
> >>>                                                             ---> 1.0
> >>>                                    ---> Firefox 1 ---> 1.0.1
> >>>                                                            ---> ...
> >>>                                                            ---> 1.5
> >>> Mozilla Firefox --->
> >>>                                   ---> Firefox 2 ...
> >>>                                   ---> Firefox 3 ...
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Data-modeling mailing list
> >>> Data-modeling at freebase.com
> >>> http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling
> >>>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Data-modeling mailing list
> >> Data-modeling at freebase.com
> >> http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling
> >>
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Data-modeling mailing list
> > Data-modeling at freebase.com
> > http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling
>
> _______________________________________________
> Data-modeling mailing list
> Data-modeling at freebase.com
> http://lists.freebase.com/mailman/listinfo/data-modeling
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.freebase.com/pipermail/data-modeling/attachments/20080430/4f3989b9/attachment.htm