2.4.10 Update

[joec]

Bottom line: Release numbers are part convention, part company specific. I've seen it done lots of different ways. But usually once a company establishes a system, they keep it consistent.

It might be fun to try and figure out exactly what they are doing with these numbers over time. If I'm correct that .10 is always the "final bug release" then we should almost never see a .11 release.

 

[jells]

A few weeks ago I updated to 2.4.4 and noticed that LTE connectivity on my standard commute/local routes was very bad (no LTE or 1 bar in areas where the coverage is usually strong). Updated last night to 2.4.10 and did some driving today on my normal routes and I noticed the LTE signal was very strong and back to normal for what it's worth.

I’m experiencing the opposite after 2.4.10. I’ll try an Air logo reset. Are there any other resets I should do to fix my unreliable LTE?

 

[borski]

I don't get the seeming anger over people's confusion with Lucid's OTA release numbering scheme. Most people are not software engineers, so when they are exposed to an apparent numerical inconsistency for the first time, they are bound to be confused. I, like many of us, have been there in past instances, so I'm sympathetic when some newcomers are scratching their heads. It's a teaching/learning opportunity!

Fair. We've had this conversation on this forum at least five times that I can count, which is why it starts to grate, especially when people argue about it. You're right, though, that I should have been kinder in my responses because though *I've* had that converastion a dozen times, that doesn't mean they have. Feedback taken. Thanks.

Here's a crazy thought... Could Lucid have simply called this 2.4.5 instead of 2.4.10? And then taken on their numbering schemes in such a manner as to minimize the number of times that this LEGITIMATELY CONFUSING (to a non-software engineer) phenomenon occurs?

The 'skips' are simply unreleased versions. In short, think of it this way: any time an engineer makes a change and is 'ready to test it' either on a car or in some simulator, they need to make a release. Of course they will have tested locally, but the only way to get a proper test is to run all of the integration tests, get it on a vehicle or simulator, etc.

Sometimes, those tests fail. When they do, that version doesn't get released to the 'public' channel; people name these channels differently, but the meaning is the same. However, that version isn't deleted; it is simply 'internal'. That way, they can always track what happened when, and they don't lose data. Version number re-use is extremely rare and very looked down upon, the only exception usually being if it was truly a botched release and didn't include things it should have, etc.

So, between 2.4.4 and 2.4.10 there may have been a bunch of versions that didn't work. Or perhaps 2.4.5 needed to be there before they could apply 2.4.6. Or, perhaps they skipped a bunch so that they could start with a new "ten."

It doesn't really matter, but all of those are likely candidates for why there seem to be 'version skips.'

 

[Buffalo Bob]

Well, I guess the GREAT news is that we've had so many OTA Updates to talk about lately, with a whole bunch more on the horizon. Sure beats the alternative!