Cross Platform: How to set a distinct incremented Build Number in UWP and keep the Version Name like in...
I am developing an App Cross-Platform for iOS, Android and UWP and I have trouble keeping the versions in sync.
iOS and Android use a build number and a version name.
Android Versioning
iOS Versioning
I can upload several builds with the same version name for testing and just increment the build number and then release the final version.
Customers only see the version name.
UWP only has the name, three numbers (major, minor, build) and you have to increment every time you upload to the store, making it impossible to test version 4.1.2, make some small changes and then release it, you'd have to count up to 4.1.3
UWP Versioning
BUT when creating App Packages, they give you a 4. place in the version name, but it is disabled.
create App Packages
Is there any way to use a build number system like in iOS/Android for UWP releases?
Any hack/Workaround helps as well
xamarin.forms windows-store-apps version versioning xamarin.uwp
asked Nov 26 '18 at 8:40
MikaMika
64
add a comment |
I am developing an App Cross-Platform for iOS, Android and UWP and I have trouble keeping the versions in sync.
iOS and Android use a build number and a version name.
Android Versioning
iOS Versioning
I can upload several builds with the same version name for testing and just increment the build number and then release the final version.
Customers only see the version name.
UWP only has the name, three numbers (major, minor, build) and you have to increment every time you upload to the store, making it impossible to test version 4.1.2, make some small changes and then release it, you'd have to count up to 4.1.3
UWP Versioning
BUT when creating App Packages, they give you a 4. place in the version name, but it is disabled.
create App Packages
Is there any way to use a build number system like in iOS/Android for UWP releases?
Any hack/Workaround helps as well
xamarin.forms windows-store-apps version versioning xamarin.uwp
asked Nov 26 '18 at 8:40
MikaMika
64
add a comment |
I am developing an App Cross-Platform for iOS, Android and UWP and I have trouble keeping the versions in sync.
iOS and Android use a build number and a version name.
Android Versioning
iOS Versioning
I can upload several builds with the same version name for testing and just increment the build number and then release the final version.
Customers only see the version name.
UWP only has the name, three numbers (major, minor, build) and you have to increment every time you upload to the store, making it impossible to test version 4.1.2, make some small changes and then release it, you'd have to count up to 4.1.3
UWP Versioning
BUT when creating App Packages, they give you a 4. place in the version name, but it is disabled.
create App Packages
Is there any way to use a build number system like in iOS/Android for UWP releases?
Any hack/Workaround helps as well
xamarin.forms windows-store-apps version versioning xamarin.uwp
asked Nov 26 '18 at 8:40
MikaMika
64
I am developing an App Cross-Platform for iOS, Android and UWP and I have trouble keeping the versions in sync.
iOS and Android use a build number and a version name.
Android Versioning
iOS Versioning
I can upload several builds with the same version name for testing and just increment the build number and then release the final version.
Customers only see the version name.
UWP only has the name, three numbers (major, minor, build) and you have to increment every time you upload to the store, making it impossible to test version 4.1.2, make some small changes and then release it, you'd have to count up to 4.1.3
UWP Versioning
BUT when creating App Packages, they give you a 4. place in the version name, but it is disabled.
create App Packages
Is there any way to use a build number system like in iOS/Android for UWP releases?
Any hack/Workaround helps as well
xamarin.forms windows-store-apps version versioning xamarin.uwp
xamarin.forms windows-store-apps version versioning xamarin.uwp
asked Nov 26 '18 at 8:40
MikaMika
64
asked Nov 26 '18 at 8:40
MikaMika
64
asked Nov 26 '18 at 8:40
MikaMika
64
asked Nov 26 '18 at 8:40
MikaMika
64
asked Nov 26 '18 at 8:40
MikaMika
64
64
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
This should be impossible to use a build number system like in ios/andriod for UWP releases.
You provide must have a version number for each package when you upload the package to the Store.For Windows UWP packages, the last (fourth) section of the version number is reserved for Store use and must be left as 0 when you build your package (although the Store may change the value in this section). The other sections must be set to an integer between 0 and 65535 (except for the first section, which cannot be 0).
You could get more information in the document:Package version numbering
Partner Center gives you several options(beta testing) to let testers try out your app before you offer it to the public.
answered Nov 27 '18 at 10:04
DasiyTian MSFTDasiyTian MSFT
2716
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53477337%2fcross-platform-how-to-set-a-distinct-incremented-build-number-in-uwp-and-keep-t%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
This should be impossible to use a build number system like in ios/andriod for UWP releases.
You provide must have a version number for each package when you upload the package to the Store.For Windows UWP packages, the last (fourth) section of the version number is reserved for Store use and must be left as 0 when you build your package (although the Store may change the value in this section). The other sections must be set to an integer between 0 and 65535 (except for the first section, which cannot be 0).
You could get more information in the document:Package version numbering
Partner Center gives you several options(beta testing) to let testers try out your app before you offer it to the public.
answered Nov 27 '18 at 10:04
DasiyTian MSFTDasiyTian MSFT
2716
add a comment |
This should be impossible to use a build number system like in ios/andriod for UWP releases.
You provide must have a version number for each package when you upload the package to the Store.For Windows UWP packages, the last (fourth) section of the version number is reserved for Store use and must be left as 0 when you build your package (although the Store may change the value in this section). The other sections must be set to an integer between 0 and 65535 (except for the first section, which cannot be 0).
You could get more information in the document:Package version numbering
Partner Center gives you several options(beta testing) to let testers try out your app before you offer it to the public.
answered Nov 27 '18 at 10:04
DasiyTian MSFTDasiyTian MSFT
2716
add a comment |
This should be impossible to use a build number system like in ios/andriod for UWP releases.
You provide must have a version number for each package when you upload the package to the Store.For Windows UWP packages, the last (fourth) section of the version number is reserved for Store use and must be left as 0 when you build your package (although the Store may change the value in this section). The other sections must be set to an integer between 0 and 65535 (except for the first section, which cannot be 0).
You could get more information in the document:Package version numbering
Partner Center gives you several options(beta testing) to let testers try out your app before you offer it to the public.
answered Nov 27 '18 at 10:04
DasiyTian MSFTDasiyTian MSFT
2716
This should be impossible to use a build number system like in ios/andriod for UWP releases.
You provide must have a version number for each package when you upload the package to the Store.For Windows UWP packages, the last (fourth) section of the version number is reserved for Store use and must be left as 0 when you build your package (although the Store may change the value in this section). The other sections must be set to an integer between 0 and 65535 (except for the first section, which cannot be 0).
You could get more information in the document:Package version numbering
Partner Center gives you several options(beta testing) to let testers try out your app before you offer it to the public.
answered Nov 27 '18 at 10:04
DasiyTian MSFTDasiyTian MSFT
2716
edited Nov 28 '18 at 1:44
answered Nov 27 '18 at 10:04
DasiyTian MSFTDasiyTian MSFT
2716
answered Nov 27 '18 at 10:04
DasiyTian MSFTDasiyTian MSFT
2716
answered Nov 27 '18 at 10:04
DasiyTian MSFTDasiyTian MSFT
2716
2716
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53477337%2fcross-platform-how-to-set-a-distinct-incremented-build-number-in-uwp-and-keep-t%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
