Comment 1 Remy Suen 2009-08-26 12:30:29 EDT

Which build did you get from the downloads page? Please provide the zip's/tarball's name.

Comment 2 David Balažic 2009-08-26 18:14:46 EDT

I just downloaded http://www.eclipse.org/downloads/download.php?file=/technology/epp/downloads/release/galileo/R/eclipse-java-galileo-win32.zip and the about dialog text is:

Eclipse IDE for Java Developers

Build id: 20090619-0625
(c) Copyright Eclipse contributors and others 2000, 2009.  All rights reserved.
Visit http://eclipse.org/

This product includes software developed by the
Apache Software Foundation http://apache.org/

Comment 3 Prakash Rangaraj 2009-08-31 01:01:09 EDT

Yes, version number is missing in Mac as well. Is that change intentional?

Comment 4 Prakash Rangaraj 2009-08-31 04:02:42 EDT

(In reply to comment #3)
> Yes, version number is missing in Mac as well. Is that change intentional?

I see it back in the 3.6 builds (it states as 3.5, but thats a different bug). Is that the EPP builds don't have version number? Potentially a EPP bug?

Comment 5 Remy Suen 2009-10-10 11:11:04 EDT

Please investigate this. Someone asked about it on IRC today.

Comment 6 David Balažic 2009-11-02 07:21:25 EST

http://www.eclipse.org/downloads/download.php?file=/technology/epp/downloads/release/galileo/SR1/eclipse-jee-galileo-SR1-win32.zip

Eclipse Java EE IDE for Web Developers.

Build id: 20090920-1017

Version still missing.

Comment 7 Remy Suen 2010-02-19 16:06:55 EST

Please investigate this. It has been raised on IRC again.

<tARrAScH> hmm, I can't find the version in Help -> About Eclipse. Am I blind or is this the first software ever to break a 20-year old convention?
<tARrAScH> or is the version system replaced with a Build id system?
<nitind> tARrAScH: It tends to be more accurate, seeing as how every build is publically available.
<tARrAScH> nitind: It's not a first-time-user friendly at all. I doubt the majority of the Eclipse users care for that precision. I mean, why not write both?
<rcjsuen> tARrAScH: I have the version number too, but I use the Eclipse SDK.
<tARrAScH> rcjsuen: Ok
<rcjsuen> tARrAScH: did you download one of the java ee packages or whatever? i think those are packaged slightly differently
<tARrAScH> rcjsuen: whatever... I'm passed that now (i downlaoded c++version)

Comment 8 David Balažic 2010-05-04 05:24:39 EDT

Same in eclipse-jee-galileo-SR2-win32

Comment 9 Markus Knauer 2010-05-29 04:37:35 EDT

I added now a

  Version: Helios Release (3.6.0)
  
to all packages. IMO it better reflects what users are expecting: The simultaneous release name *and* the Eclipse Platform release version which is the basis for the package.

Comment 10 Markus Knauer 2010-05-29 04:42:39 EDT

*** Bug 313061 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 11 Markus Knauer 2010-06-04 03:00:05 EDT

*** Bug 315699 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 12 David Williams 2010-06-04 03:22:36 EDT

(In reply to comment #9)
> I added now a
> 
>   Version: Helios Release (3.6.0)
> 
> to all packages. IMO it better reflects what users are expecting: The
> simultaneous release name *and* the Eclipse Platform release version which is
> the basis for the package.

Certainly some users expect the number, but others find it confusing. I'd expect WTP's version to be in JEE IDE package :). And it is certainly "out of style". It used to be on the splash screen (along with Ganymede name etc., but it was agree better to get used to dropping numbers, and I think it was dropped in Galileo. Those numbers are a habit of mind that's hard to break.

Comment 13 Markus Knauer 2010-06-07 15:17:30 EDT

I understand... then it would be

  Version: Helios Release

and later maybe

  Version: Helios Service Release 1
  Version: Helios Service Release 2

In my opinion it is at least important that all packages have the same "version" in the about dialogs.

Comment 14 Juergen Weber 2010-06-24 07:06:00 EDT

I think the version number should be in the about dialog, too. 
So instead of "Version: Helios Release"
it should be "Version: Helios Release (Eclipse 3.6.0)"

Same as java -version doesn't show the code name "Mustang" but rather
java version "1.6.0_20"

Comment 15 David Balažic 2010-08-27 08:42:54 EDT

In current version (eclipse-jee-helios-win32.zip) it says:

Eclipse Java EE IDE for Web Developers.

Version: Helios Release
Build id: 20100617-1415

Comment 16 Juergen Weber 2010-08-27 08:57:33 EDT

That's true.

And it would be nice, if it also said "3.6.0".

Comment 17 David Williams 2010-08-27 10:52:53 EDT

I think this bug should be marked "resolved, fixed", but won't since it is in the general EPP packager component ... I'll leave that up to Markus to make final decision. 

But the name of the release is "Helios" (and subsequent Helios SR1, Helios SR2), it does not include "3.6.0" in the name. (And, if anyone wants _that_ to change, you should work through your Planning Council representative to lobby for a change in Planning Council naming policy). 

Perhaps there should be a new bug that asks for an additional, more meaningful, short list of features that are in a package (with just three parts of version numbers displayed). Something like that has long desired and discussed (e.g. see bug 263998 and bug 265900), and efforts there would be more profitable, IMHO. Perhaps EPP could "side step" some of the complications or problems in those general, automatic, complete lists of features, and have simply an "authored" list of features displayed? (with a button for "complete list, as there is now).  I think it would be wrong, and confusing, to list just one feature version in the about box. 

To show how complicated it can get, for Indigo, the tentative plan is to be primarily based on 3.7 Platform, but to allow/enable users to update to 4.1 Platform, if they'd like. But then, presumably, tentatively, JDT and PDE will will still be at 3.7 level, and WTP still be at 3.3 level.  My point is only that the number in about box doesn't add much, you really need the feature list and numbers to know that's installed, and that otherwise, the "release name" is what it is (and the number is not part of what it is).  

I understand there's multiple, valid points of view here, so will leave it up to Markus to decide resolution and subsequent actions, if needed. 

Thanks for the ideas and discussions.

Comment 18 David Balažic 2010-08-27 11:17:45 EDT

I think the platform version number should be in the about dialog.
The GUI (menus, dialogs, including the About dialog) belongs to Platform, right? (I'm guessing here, don't know the inners of Eclipse that good).

Which component does the Build id come from?

Comment 19 David Williams 2010-08-27 12:14:11 EDT

(In reply to comment #18)

> The GUI (menus, dialogs, including the About dialog) belongs to Platform,
> right? (I'm guessing here, don't know the inners of Eclipse that good).

Some do, and certainly "the infrastructure" does. But participating features can add things, change things, remove things. I'm not saying the Platform is not important ... probably most important! ... but, just that its confusing to list only it. (In the past, we sometimes get bug reports in WTP that say, basically, "I found this bug in version 3.6 of WTP" ...  which doesn't mean anything to us in WTP and takes a lot of back and forth to figure out what people have installed. 

> 
> Which component does the Build id come from?

In EPP, it comes from EPP ... and the EPP feature would be "1.2.0" or something ... if we really wanted to confuse everyone. :) In other "products" the build ID comes from how ever those other products define it (and the Eclipse SDK is a "product" in the sense I mean it here). 


What problem, or use case is trying to be solved here, with this "about" identification? Is is so you can tell or confirm what you are running, when you have multiple versions installed? Is it so you can communicate better with others about bugs or tutorials? 

Perhaps better understanding what users in general are trying to use this for will better decide what action or improvements need to be made?

Comment 20 Markus Knauer 2011-05-20 11:42:25 EDT

Closing as FIXED.
(I know the discussion could go on for many years, but up to now I think we have all the relevant information in the about dialog.)

Comment 21 Dani Megert 2012-09-13 04:30:19 EDT

*** Bug 389170 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 22 Dani Megert 2012-09-13 04:31:38 EDT

The version should be there, especially for Juno where we have 3.8 and 4.2 in the Eclipse SDK.

Comment 23 Juergen Weber 2012-09-13 04:38:12 EDT

Juno's about does not mention 4.2

-----
Eclipse Java EE IDE for Web Developers.

Version: Juno Release
Build id: 20120614-1722

(c) Copyright Eclipse contributors and others 2005, 2012.  All rights reserved.
Visit http://www.eclipse.org/webtools

Comment 24 Paul Webster 2012-12-06 09:19:51 EST

*** Bug 395912 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 25 Robin Stocker 2013-08-10 17:56:55 EDT

Just had another developer complain about this to me while talking about Eclipse. How about adding another line which shows the platform version? With Kepler, it could look something like this:

  Version: Kepler Release
  Platform: Eclipse 4.3.0
  Build id: 20130614-0229

Comment 26 Gunnar Wagenknecht 2014-03-05 12:24:26 EST

Markus, I think we should just fix that and include the version number of the Eclipse Platform in the about dialog.

Is the build-id related to the platform build or is that an EPP build id? If related to platform, what about the following branding:

----
Eclipse Package for Cool Developers.

Luna Release
(based on Eclipse 4.4 build 20120614-1722)

(c)....
----

Comment 27 Dani Megert 2014-03-05 12:30:07 EST

FYI, the Eclipse Platform and SDK downloads show this:

Version: Luna (4.4)

Comment 28 Markus Knauer 2014-03-06 02:25:16 EST

Yep, I thought the same. In fact, I already added the version yesterday morning and pushed the small change right now (commit 3377463cdb5bfe6dce309e1af95e407f99d0a818).

In addition to the version (of the Eclipse Platform, of EPP) I've included the milestone number. Because it is easy to update from milestone to milestone I thought that this additional information is quite handy and does no harm. Let's hope that this helps users.

The build ID specifies an EPP build and isn't related to an Eclipse Platform build ID. I'd like to keep this as it is because the package is built by EPP.

Comment 29 Markus Knauer 2014-03-07 06:00:32 EST

The latest build from last night shows this information in the About dialog. The other packages show the same (except the name, of course).

%< ------------------------------------------
Eclipse for RCP and RAP Developers

Version: Luna M6 Release (4.4.0M6)
Build id: 20140306-1632
%< ------------------------------------------

(See bug 420511 for additional info)