Suggestion: State the version in the dat name even if there is only 1

[Hiccup]

Suggestion: State the version in the dat name even if there is only one version
E.g. New Super Mario Bros. Wii (Japan) should be New Super Mario Bros. Wii (Japan) (v1.01) even though there is no other version

Currently it is quite confusing. I can't actually tell that it is v1.1 without opening the ISO (e.g. in Dolphin) to check.

This is how No-Intro does it, and doesn't Redump follow No-Intro naming convention? Maybe I misunderstand how strictly Redump follows it though.

[RetroGamer]

It should be only added when there are revisions to distinguish between them... I don't see the point in adding the version to the filename when there are no known revisions...

Fireball, why this disc https://redump.info/disc/8169 is marked as Rev A? The ringcode says that it's a Rev A but i dumped a lot of discs from different sources, original box and plastic box and i never found the older revision, so it probably doesn't exist... and i never heard of annyone finding it neither...

[Hiccup]

"I don't see the point"
I gave a point in my first post

[RetroGamer]

Confusing?! Well, i think otherwise... Confusing is having all this versions added to the filename when there aren't known revisions (like in the No-Intro PSP dats...)... In Redump i think all the Version info is stored in the DB but they are only used in the filename when there are known or already dumped revisions... It makes the naming scheme more"clean"...

[F1ReB4LL]

Fireball, why this disc https://redump.info/disc/8169 is marked as Rev A? The ringcode says that it's a Rev A but i dumped a lot of discs from different sources, original box and plastic box and i never found the older revision, so it probably doesn't exist... and i never heard of annyone finding it neither...

Because, judging by other discs, the Rev 0 should exist as well. No-Intro also adds the revision, when it's known and when other ones are likely to exist.

https://www.satakore.com/sega-saturn-ga … n-EUR.html -- also lists the Rev 0 as unconfirmed, but possible to exist.

Currently it is quite confusing. I can't actually tell that it is v1.1 without opening the ISO (e.g. in Dolphin) to check.

And why do you need to tell that?

[Hiccup]

Why do I need to tell what the version is? I don't understand the question.

[F1ReB4LL]

Why do you need to know the version? What does it tell you?

[RetroGamer]

Exactly... Why do we have to name it 1.00 or 1.01 or whatever if it was the only version that came out?...

About the Daytona CCE, the revision A must be the original release so it's better to remove that tag from the fileneme until someone finds the Rev0...
And it should be added to the wiki missing list to intensify the search.
BTW, the Virtua Cop 2 demo should be removed. I dumped it and it matched the retail version...

[Hiccup]

"(v1.01)" tells me that its not "(v1.02)", which is undumped but does exist. And even if it wasn't confirmed to exist, it still might exist.

[F1ReB4LL]

Yes, I see the logic now. Most of the releases are v1.00 with the ringcodes end with "-0", some have the updated ones, like v1.01 with the ringcodes end with "-1", etc., so, when you see a standalone v1.01/"-1" or v1.02/"-2", you can assume the earlier versions should exist.

So, the suggestion should be not to "state the version in the dat name even if there is only one version", but to "state the version in the dat if the earlier version/revision is likely to exist". Sounds reasonable, I'm OK with that, but I'm not the GC/Wii/WiiU sections maintainer, so I'd like to hear their dumpers'/mods' opinions as well.