It might be just me - but it makes sense to me that as a newer software/firmware comes out that the version numbers should be in order.

Example

Which is newer -- (version 5.15 or 5.9 or 5.5)

5.9 is a larger number than 5.15 & 5.5 so a person might think that 5.9 is the newest version.
The 5.5 should really be 5.05 and the 5.9 should really be 5.09
if you are looking for the larger number for a version you are in trouble.

I would like to see a version numbering system like this :
5.05 routeros-mipsbe-5.5.npk renamed to routeros-mipsbe-5.05.npk
5.09 routeros-mipsbe-5.9.npk renamed to routeros-mipsbe-5.09.npk
5.15 routeros-mipsbe-5.15.npk
Where the larger number is the newer version number.

In school, we learned to count: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13

This is also the universal standard in computer software versioning:

Linux kernel versions:
3.3.5
3.2.16
3.1.10
3.0.31
2.6.35.13
2.6.34.11
2.6.32.59
2.6.27.62

MacOS versions:

10.4.8
10.4.9
10.4.10
10.4.11

It might be just me - but it makes sense to me that as a newer software/firmware comes out that the version numbers should be in order.

I can confirm that its not just you. i also made the exact same mistake the first time i saw those version numbers. but as normis pointed out, it seems rather to be universal standard. basically '.' , between the two numbers, should be treated as a simple dot (as opposed to 'point').
However, all of those examples that normis provided, have at least 2 dots in them. that makes it quite obvious, and they won't be mistaken with anything else. that is not the case in mikrotik firmware version numbers. so i believe your argument, is still valid.

In school, we learned to count: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13

This is also the universal standard in computer software versioning:

Linux kernel versions:
3.3.5
3.2.16
3.1.10
3.0.31
2.6.35.13
2.6.34.11
2.6.32.59
2.6.27.62

MacOS versions:

10.4.8
10.4.9
10.4.10
10.4.11

I love that reply Normis!
If the versions are that confusing you probably should also consider a switch to Ubiquiti as they have pretty pictures in their gui and try to make things real simple. Mikrotik products are for people with a degree of intelligence and that fictional thing called common sense.

However, all of those examples that normis provided, have at least 2 dots in them

RouterOS always had two dots until a few of the last versions. v2.8.14, v2.9.25 etc.

RouterOS always had two dots until a few of the last versions. v2.8.14, v2.9.25 etc.

I did not know that. then maybe a better request would be continuing your old version numbering. the numbering you're using right now, is actually only confusing to new users. but when even that could be avoided, why not doing so? not to mention that it would help you to better manage firmware numbers base on the amount of changes you make on each one.

we had a massive amount of requests to switch to new style, because old style was considered confusing. I guess each thing is confusing to somebody

we had a massive amount of requests to switch to new style, because old style was considered confusing. I guess each thing is confusing to somebody

ok! Although I'm not sure why it was considered confusing, but better stick with the new style if that's the case.

well... anyway, MikroTik never fixes previous versions (for example, there will never be 5.10.1, they'll place fixes in 5.17), so there's no sense in the dot just integer version won't confuse anyone

RouterOS v938 is older than v1078 - anyone will tell that

RouterOS v938 is older than v1078 - anyone will tell that

Not so sure. What if that v938 is actually meant as v9380? There is never a limit to craziness of interpretation.

Not so sure. What if that v938 is actually meant as v9380? There is never a limit to craziness of interpretation.

okay, you won. please call it 'RouterOS version of 10th May, 2012' xD

Ubuntu style? Year.Month

Ubuntu style? Year.Month

then November is older than February - that's what this topic started from

facepalm

Had some headache when programming our auto version upgrader-downgrader due to this...
A note: netinstall was not in classroom when we learned to count versions. He thinks 5.8 > 5.12

where does netinstall compare versions? %)

If string type data is sorted, characters are compared in succession: 5|.|1|2
So you have "1" compared vs "8". It doesn't care about the second character. Depends on with what you make your scripts, you have to use special algorithms to order minor version numbers.

and it's the same when comparing Kernel versions (like 2.6.5.3 vs 2.6.33.11 - textually the latter is greater)

And why RouterOS show 5.2 is higher then 5.16 ?

just because WinBox sorts versions as text fields =)

Yeah, seems like winbox needs some revision for that matter

honzam,do you run the latest RouterOS and Winbox version? My router neighbor list is attached

huh, indeed - things changed somewhere between 5.7 (text sort) and 5.14 (numeric sort) =)

Deleted because not related.

In school, we learned to count: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13

This is also the universal standard in computer software versioning:

Linux kernel versions:
3.3.5
3.2.16
3.1.10
3.0.31
2.6.35.13
2.6.34.11
2.6.32.59
2.6.27.62

MacOS versions:

10.4.8
10.4.9
10.4.10
10.4.11

So good answer. + 1 like.

I made that mistake once .....



very disappointing ...

Once and for all: RouterOS versions are numbered sequentially, when a period is used to separate sequences, it does not represent a decimal point, and the sequences do not have positional significance. An identifier of 2.5, for instance, is not "two and a half" or "half way to version three", it is the fifth second-level revision of the second first-level revision. Therefore v5.2 is older than v5.18, which is newer.

In school, we learned to count: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13

very simple answer, i like it. +1. it doesn't make me confused anyway.