Minecraft Forums

So, as most of you already were aware, 1.9 is "planned" to be released before the 18th (spoilers are images; click the links if you'd rather not lag the page):


---> Proof.


However, this also seems to be the date that new code was intended to halt (as the focus is drawn to refining and fine-tuning):


--->Proof.


So my question is: will there even be a 1.10? I'm beginning to think that 1.9 will be the final content patch before the official release in November (excluding the obvious mending of code and the removal of bugs)?

EDIT: If there are any previous topics relating to this then I sincerely apologize; I did use the search function (Google included), but could not find the answers that I am in search of.

Quote from Terminably

So, as most of you already were aware, 1.9 is "planned" to be released before the 18th (spoilers are images; click the links if you'd rather not lag the page):

---> Proof.


However, this also seems to be the date that new code was intended to halt (as the focus is drawn to refining and fine-tuning):

--->Proof.


So my question is: will there even be a 1.10? I'm beginning to think that 1.9 will be the final content patch before the official release in November (excluding the obvious mending of code and the removal of bugs)?

I can only assume that 1.10 will be the code halt. Then Mojang will work on polish for the official 1.0 release

1.10 will be the official release then updates after will be 1.11 1.12

1.10 is the official release...
or at least soon after...
hence the .10

I hope Notch never stops updating. What would Minecraft be without waiting months for an update? :tongue.gif:

They are kind of fast and loose with their versioning since they started numbering betas with a 1 instead of a 0. Even if they were leaks or pre-releases of versions they should have been numbered somehow. I would have gone with 1.9.0.1 instead of pre 1, and had the official 1.9 release be 1.9.1.

Out of pure bored speculation I think the feature lock version that goes out on the 18th-ish (you know they'll be a little late) will be 1.9, with a few 1.9.x bug fixes appearing along the way.

They could go one of two ways for the true "production" version. Either just strip off that word "beta" and roll out 1.10, or reset the versioning to 1.0 of production.

Again, since they kind of do their own thing I'm speculating that they will just remove the word beta and go with 1.10.

Has Jeb_ or Notch ever talked about what sort of source control they use? I'm not picturing them using formal source control software but instead a big whiteboard with specific pathnames written in dry erase marker and lots of file access errors.

Based on what we are seeing I would say it's safe to assume that 1.9 will be the last update before the actual release (2.0?).

They probably dropped doing a 1.10 update since they started doing the pre-releases. Then, Minecraft reverts back to version 1 when it hits the full release. And yes, he will continue updating after the fact. He has said this many times.

There's no guarantee we won't have to pay for additional content after the full release, though.

Unless you're an alpha buyer.

I wouldn't get too much hopes up on a super huge huge update for the full game. The whole point of beta testing publicly is so we can all test everything. Issues can be found through testing(problems with only certain computers, etc.) that are trickier to find without it. I can't see them suddenly blowing up with a gigantic update of things that HAVEN'T been tested for the official release!

I expect a small update for the official release. "Finalizing" everything. Putting the pieces together! The only new content I really expect is to see 'more' of things we already have and more connecting pieces to the world. I expect a few new achievements(to reflect potions at least!) , smoothing out dialogue with NPCs(if it's finished before official release), and just fixing general buggy things that we've always just dealt with, but don't look good for a 'real' game.

So don't be disappointed when we aren't as "wow'd!" by official minecraft as the rest of the world who didn't get the beta will be. We've been playing it all along and already know 90% of the content! :smile.gif: Most beta testers know the entire game before it's released. They don't just stop beta testing the game in the middle so they can surprise the testers with the full release! So I expect us to know most of what's to come! We may get a few surprises, but I think it won't be the biggest update ever--Maybe the biggest BUGFIX update ever!

guys guys guys...

this is what Notch means: "there will be no major content work after that deadline, only bug fixes until the Nov 11th deadline" cause, you know, more content=more bugs. BUT, it also means that AFTER Nov 11th the happiness of new junk will resume! rejoice! I'm sure they want to work on other projects too and content patches may be sparse, but Notch has stated on many occasions that he will always add more stuff.

from what I can reason, it looks like there will be a 1.9 final soon with a 1.10 either happening on the 18th or will be the final release on Nov 11th. I'd wager there will be a 1.10 though... even if it is a bug patch.

either way... dragons guys! dragons! >D

Guys, I am just saying. Not trying to start anything, but 1.10 is the same thing as 1.1 There is no difference. Speaking from a math point of view of course. If there was another uptate, It would probobly be 2.0, or 1.9.

1.10 is the same as 1.1 is the same as 1.1000

EDIT, looks like Lastof Got to my point before me.

Quote from qwertykon

Guys, I am just saying. Not trying to start anything, but 1.10 is the same thing as 1.1 There is no difference. Speaking from a math point of view of course. If there was another uptate, It would probobly be 2.0, or 1.9.

1.10 is the same as 1.1 is the same as 1.1000

EDIT, looks like Lastof Got to my point before me.

That would make a whole lot of sense, EXCEPT that version numbers don't work from 'a math point of view'
Version numbers aren't decimals, they are integers seperated by dots. 1.10 comes after 1.9, because it's not the same as decimal numbers in math.

major.minor.bugfix

for example, 1.32 is a higher number than 1.6 in the case of version numbers. 1.32 would be the 32nd minor update to version 1, where as 1.6 would only be the 6th minor update.

Since versioning uses numbers it makes people confused. They want to do math where none exists. The periods aren't decimal points either - they're separators.

Just remember, it's a label, not a number. It could be done with letters too (but it's not).

Example:

• First version: "A"
• Add a new feature: "A.A"
• Oops, "A.A" has a bug. Fix it. Now it's "A.A.A"
• Oops, "A.A.A" has a bug. Fix it. Now it's "A.A.B"
• Add a new feature: "A.B"

And so on. So what happens when we get to "A.Z" and we want to release a new feature? We're out of letters!

We release "A.AA" Similar to going from 1.9 to 1.10. And life goes on: "A.AA" has a bug of course. Fix it. Now it's "A.AA.A". Fix another one "A.AA.B". Lather, rinse, repeat.

What finally happens when we finally rewrite our program from dodgy Java to something proper? First position typically iterates to "B". And hopefully you have some sort of release party.

This isn't exact and some people do things slightly differently than this based on what they consider major revisions, but I hope it helped clarify that versioning isn't math. It's iterative labeling.

Quote from GorgeousTaylor

There's no guarantee we won't have to pay for additional content after the full release, though.

Unless you're an alpha buyer.

There's no way to tell whether you bought the game in Alpha or Beta. I'm sure they aren't tracking exactly when each and every gift code is purchased. If they were it would be a huge security risk to have this information present. Besides alpha users paid 5 dollars for their copy. We paid 5 times more than you. We shouldn't have to pay additionally for content than alpha users.

Both of you raise valid points, and this is how it varies in practice, from shop to shop, developer to developer. I just used letters to illustrate the point - I could have used hieroglyphics or roman numerals (yuk) or whatever.

Hopefully what we have accomplished is to help remove the popular misconception that versioning equals math, or equals decimal counting, and that it is instead a form of labeling or, well, versioning.

Few people read threads around here, they just make new ones so I expect to see many more new posts about this as we approach production.

Seeing as how 1.10 makes no sense Im glad it isnt happening. You can't have a 1.10.

1 + 10 tenths equals 2.
1.10 = 2.

Either that or 1.10 would simply equal 1.1. There probably won't be a 1.10 because that isn't even a proper development number.

Quote from Crunchy Shadow

Seeing as how 1.10 makes no sense Im glad it isnt happening. You can't have a 1.10.

1 + 10 tenths equals 2.
1.10 = 2.

Either that or 1.10 would simply equal 1.1. There probably won't be a 1.10 because that isn't even a proper development number.

Please read the posts above yours.

Really guys? They wont release it as 1.10 or 1.9 or whatever. They will do what they did for ALPHA and BETA and revert back to 1.0 again.

1.10, 1.9, 1.Butterscotch

The name doesn't matter in the slightest.

Updates will be released even after the full release, the title does not mean much.