Talk:Java Edition version history/Development versions

Sign your posts with ~ and always add new posts at the very bottom after previous sections.

This page lags computers
Is there a way we can make the change-log area start closed like Template:blocks. It would make the page load munch faster.--007a83 (Talk&#124;Contribs) 20:10, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok, I just went and did it. PAGE LOADS FASTER NOW.--007a83 (Talk&#124;Contribs) 18:51, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Launcher updates in their own section? Title says it all.

Night vision
"Night Vision Potion effect blinks before running out." in 1.7 snapshot, wasn't that already in 1.6.2? Ikkentim 15:40, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Mesa Biome
Does anyone have a regular spawned Mesa biome like it should be (with hardened clay)? Nobody seems able to get it, just the corrupted generation we got in the first snapshot, basically the fix from Grum did not work (see MC-29446). Greetings --Galaxy_2Alex (Talk)

Secret Features
Please add under a secret feature title that if you attempt to click the flint and steel on a creeper, it explodes. Flaming arrows 59 18:03, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Nice, I thought that will be a PE-only feature. --Galaxy_2Alex (Talk)

I've also found that there is a packed ice block and the /summon command thanks to sethblings review video. Theflamingarrows1 22:38, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

http://youtube.com/index?&desktop_uri=%2F#/watch?feature=g-high-u&v=SZmKYtRM6iU
 * Packed ice and /summon is nothing special or secret. Please do not post things under the wrong heading.

13w36a
I encountered a naturally spawned upside-down skeleton, the name tag never became visible.  LB ( T 19:37, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Snapshot 1.6.3?
There's a new version in my launcher titled "snapshot 1.6.3". It's exactly the same as 1.6.2 as far as I can tell. Is anyone else getting this? MarioLuigi2010 20:18, 15 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I haven't checked my launcher yet, but 1.6.3 only fixes a bug where nether fortresses weren't being kept in the world save file. -- t  numbermaniac  c  21:37, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

THIS 1 PAGE FOR EVERYTHING IS OUT OF CONTROL
This page is sloppy and way past due for being split into separate pages. I have posted this numerous times and am seriously sick of it. I am not alone. This page is too long and its well known! I can not scroll anymore without having to use my arrow keys!

Who ever owns and operates this wiki need to fix it. Someone has to have the contact information to an ADMIN that can fix this MAJOR ISSUE.

This is not a SMALL MINOR ISSUE. Its a MAJOR ISSUE for all of the Minecraftians!

NOTE: This in not vandalism in any way! I would have made separate the pages myself had it been possible... All I ask is effort is put forth, there is no excuse for the not spiting these pages up! This is just sure laziness on the Owners, Admin, and all that run this site.
 * Why would we split the page into parts? Most people only look at the top of the page, and who wants to see the rest can just scroll down instead of searching through the wiki to other pages. -- TheWombatGuru   t undefinedc  NL Admin  22:00, 18 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Most browsers wait until everything has been downloaded before it shows anything on the page. This issue has been raised before, but there's nothing we can do until MediaWiki is upgraded. The problem is that splitting the pages breaks verlink, but this can be fixed once we're moved to Gamepedia and the Lua programming language is enabled. Hopefully that hapeens soon. -- t  numbermaniac  c  22:23, 18 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry guys, I have to totally agree with the original poster here. This page is WAY too large, and will (if it hasn't already) start breaking in some browsers. Each version should have it's own page with the most recent transcluded in full here, with links to the older ones. -- Wynthyst [[Image:User Wynthyst sig icon.png ]] talk  23:30, 18 September 2013 (UTC)


 * It's already been discussed to split it out when it won't break every link. But we're stuck waiting for the update so we can update to a lua version of verlink with the new pages. Its not practical to support per version pages with a template. –ultradude25 ᐸ Talk Contribs – 04:18, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
 * If something is breaking browsers, or on the verge of breaking browsers, where users are complaining about it, you don't wait to fix it for some unspecified time. I have split it out into separate pages the old fashioned wiki way, and btw... I see no discussion here on this page regarding splitting it out.. can you point me at that discussion? -- Wynthyst [[Image:User Wynthyst sig icon.png ]] talk  04:38, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
 * The first post in /Archive 3/.
 * User talk:Ultradude25/Archive 10 -- t  numbermaniac  c  05:17, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
 * So this problem was identified 4 months ago.... and the solution for the problem was to wait an indefinite amount of time (since there was no clear time frame on when MCW was going to get the necessary software upgrade), during which time this problem was simply going to get worse with each version update.... I'm having a hard time comprehending the logic here. Then to top it off, the discussion regarding this ongoing issue was archived.... not a proper use of archives btw. Well, it's done now. The page has been split into separate pages. There was a time when Media Wiki would provide a warning message if a page was nearing 32k, because it would break browsers.... this page was more like 300k. There are very few justifiable reasons for keeping 3 years of patch notes on a single page. BTW, this doesn't actually break the verlink template, all of the links will continue to go to the appropriate history page, a user may however need to click one additional time to get to the individual page. -- Wynthyst [[Image:User Wynthyst sig icon.png ]] talk  05:56, 19 September 2013 (UTC)


 * It was archived because no one had put forth any feasible ideas to keep it active.
 * The reason that message was removed is it only effects really old browsers that no one uses any more (and maybe mobile browsers with their limited RAM, but we don't even have a mobile site yet). And breaking browsers isn't the issue anyway. It's the amount of time it takes to load a page of this size. You've split the pages out and transcluded them back in, which makes the edit box a bit faster (although it's not much of an issue), but the actual problem still remains.
 * You could split the pages out if you think it's really that important, but it will mean all the links to this page need to be fixed in addition to the template, which isn't really doable because there's no way to identify which version a snapshot belongs to (without having a long list of every snapshot ever). I would count clicking a link and not being take to the right place as broken.
 * Since viewing the current version is more important than older versions, the only solution I have for this page is to move the current version's snapshots out to a individual page which we manually link to, and leave this page to rot until we've got the software to fix it up. Additionally, that would work well with the idea of every major version having its own page and either scrapping this page entirely or having it link to the different versions. –ultradude25 ᐸ Talk Contribs – 06:29, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
 * If we split this page into individual pages of VERSION (no Snapshot), it won't be so laggy at all, BUT, if we split it into individual snapshots pages, it will be annoying to see every single one, intead of seeing it in one page.--The Wither Steve (talk) 23:57, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Links are wrong in 13w38c
They are almost fully correct but they have 13w38b still in them as a directory higher up. I am unable to change them as im new :/ XLRDxREVENGEx (talk) 21:57, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Super Secret Settings
At the section 13w36b, it states a small update but it never says that this button is added. Also there it's named Super Secret Options but it's Super Secret Settings. At 13w38a it's written with lowcase letters. --Hun Norberto (talk) 17:49, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Snapshots Reuploads
Hey, maybe we should add checksums (md5?) to differentiate the specific versions of one snapshot? -- N3odymium (talk) 07:47, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Found something from the Extreme Hills+ Biome
I think there was another addition to the Extreme Hills+ biome, I came across Silverfish spawn stones when I was mining stairs through the biome. There is no stronghold near my location, I've already leveled a mountain and came across various "veins" of these mob spawning stones. –Preceding unsigned comment was added by Skellitor301 (talk • contribs)&#32;04:02, 25 September 2013&#32;(UTC). Please sign your posts with


 * This isn't new; monster egg blocks were added to Extreme Hills in snapshot 12w38a last year. See Monster Egg. -- Orthotopetalk 05:01, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Illuminating mushrooms for 1.7?
"Roofed/Black Forest

-Has dark grass and giant mushrooms with 2 by 2 spruce trees -Has extremely dense trees and leaves; dark and dangerous under the canopy even during :the day -Monsters will most likely be able to spawn during the day and the night -This is the first biome aside from the Mushroom Island that naturally spawns with giant :mushrooms -It appears to have yellow illuminating mushrooms"

I haven't found any of those mushrooms on 13w36b snapshot, nor does anywhere say there'll be a new block/item. Where does this info come from? 87.218.133.90 15:11, 11 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Trying updating to the newest snapshot. I'm pretty sure the newest is 13w38c. I've seen the second one recently. -- t  numbermaniac  ==c  03:53, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism for this Page
The entire text for 13w39b is full of things like

"Steve can get Hard"

"Nukes"

"Wither dragon"

And It calls the admins and wiki "Stupid!"

Please help, It says nothing on the mojang website, so this was my only resource for snapshots recently.

Sorry, I don't understand gamepediaReadytorock2011 (talk) 21:41, 8 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Yup, we're experiencing vandalism from Rapidgame7. Unfortunaly, admins are offline so they can't deal with him.

In the meanwhile, you'll have to avoid the wiki so you won't get false infromation from him. 86.41.118.152 21:45, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Hey, I'm not vandalizing. There's an history thingy, ya know. You are the one that is spamming. Also you have to use correct grammar!

Do not make everybody think I'm the guy that is spamming! And again, there's the edit history! --Rapidgame7 (talk) 22:23, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

I found a new bug! :(
When I was building my city, a make a farm, but was going ugly, so I destroy it with water. When I tried to substitute the water with a block of dirt, but I couldn't. Why?

Don't know, but if you really think it's a bug, report it here, at the official bug tracker. --geo1088 (talk) 20:47, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

A suggestion for older editions
1.5 and previous versions have been given their own pages, but then linked here. I'm wondering whether we can use LoadPage for those? Might be useful. -- t  numbermaniac  c  00:25, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree, I think all snapshots except 1.7 should be archived with Load Page Template 81.129.71.114 08:42, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I'd leave 1.6 as it is, but the other versions are currently empty headers. We should make some use of it at least. -- t  numbermaniac  <sup style="color:#00E">c  21:31, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Any objections with me doing this? -- <sup style="font-weight:normal; color:#00E">t  numbermaniac  <sup style="color:#00E">c  07:15, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, I've gone ahead with it. -- <sup style="font-weight:normal; color:#00E">t  numbermaniac  <sup style="color:#00E">c  21:01, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Related to this, is there a reason the new 1.8 snapshots are going straight to individual pages without the information showing on this page? As it sits right now, we have a trio of links that have no real connection to each other or this page, followed by the Load Page template for 1.7 and earlier. At the very least the individual snapshot pages need to be compiled into a 1.8 page that can be loaded into this page.205.134.200.53 06:19, 12 January 2014 (UTC)


 * This page either won't exist for much longer, or will simply be a list of links to the development version pages, which they will be split up to once 1.8 comes out. –Matt ᐸ <small style=display:inline-block;line-height:9px;vertical-align:-3px>Talk Contribs ⎜ 06:34, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Skeletons
It looks like they can now spawn with iron armor and now shoot flaming arrows. is this all new? Raincreepers (talk) 22:32, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * With the new changes making areas get harder over time, mobs spawn with higher and higher levels of equipment/enchants. --GufNZ (c: (talk) 00:50, 18 October 2013 (UTC)


 * They've been able to spawn with any type of armor since 1.4.2 was released, nearly a year ago. Flaming arrows are probably the result of one spawing with a Flame-enchanted bow; this feature was added at the same time. -- Orthotopetalk 02:45, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Changes in terrain generation code?
Is it possible that there are changes in the terrain generation code between snapshots, especially from 13w39a onwards where red sand is the only relevant thing reported in the changelogs?

Force Unicode Font button
I just found a button called "Force Unicode Font" (under language selection, obviously) which, like the name implies, allows you to change whether Unicode font is forced or not. I'd like to add that to the Wiki but since I found no pages/videos/bug fixes mentioning it, I am not even sure whether this was added in the 13w42b snapshot... --Robotkoer 17:50, 19 October 2013 (UTC)


 * It does appear to exist: . -- <sup style="font-weight:normal; color:#00E">t  numbermaniac  <sup style="color:#00E">c  21:10, 20 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Hmm, that bug report became after my comment so it seems like this was added in 13w42b, I'll add that to the wiki :) --Robotkoer 13:37, 21 October 2013 (UTC)


 * It was reported as 13w42b, now fixed in 13w43a. -- <sup style="font-weight:normal; color:#00E">t  numbermaniac  <sup style="color:#00E">c  20:14, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Reference to private video?
I believe the reference 3 is linking to a private video. Is it working for anyone else? http://minecraft.gamepedia.com/Version_history/Development_versions#cite_note-2 -Keithicus420 (talk) 05:07, 22 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Yep, it's private. I've added a note within the ref. -- <sup style="font-weight:normal; color:#00E">t  numbermaniac  <sup style="color:#00E">c  05:31, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Minecraft PE
When is 0.8.0 coming out? I play PE and I'm really excited. My friends said it's coming out at the end of November but I'm not sure that's when.66.117.244.215 15:17, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Missing Information
Under 13w48a, there is something about the achievement "Adventuring Time", but there isn't any information as to when it was actually first released. Can someone confirm when it was added? --geo1088 (talk) 20:51, 27 November 2013 (UTC)


 * It was added back in 13w36a. Though since added there have been several bugs that prevented the player from attaining the achievement. KnightMiner (talk) 01:01, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Doors misaligning in Version 1.7.2
i noticed on an online server that my door was screwy and it seems that the door wants to hinge at the handle but open on the hinge so not sure if anyone else has noticed it but i went to single player and it did the same thing. Sparda3092 (talk) 00:35, 2 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Note: This is not a page for reporting bugs; they should be posted on the official bug tracker instead. For more information see the Issues page.'' taken from main page. ADCK (talk) 00:38, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Rainbow Sheep
Anyone know the exact version it was added in? | This Reddit Post seems to have pinpointed it to 13w48a or b. Will do some testing. KnightMiner (talk) 01:19, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Tested, no rainbow sheep in 13w47e and yes rainbow sheep in 13w48b. No 13w48a in the launcher to test though. KnightMiner (talk) 01:28, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I happened to have version 13w48a in my launcher, no rainbow sheeps in that version. -- TheWombatGuru   <sup style="color:#00F">t undefined<sup style="color:#00F">c  NL Admin  15:43, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Page splitting
I know some people had lag experiences entering this page. That's actually true. I don't have problem if the wiki editors split this page into individual version pages (e.g. 1.7, 1.6, 1.5). And I totally agree. But now, some people wants to split ALL the page, into individual pages. Snapshots, downloads, organization will be lost in this page. We've manteined this page for years, and now people wants to turn this news page into a link page. We can do individual versions pages, but please do not change our page to a link page.--The Wither Steve (talk) 00:13, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
 * As a long-time user, I have to second this. The "one page per snapshot" format is a pain in the ass to use; in order to locate the content I'm looking for (i.e. non-bugfix updates), I now have to check a dozen different pages, three quarters of which are not what I am looking for. Merging them all into "Version history/1.8 Snapshots" would greatly improve readability. 173.69.39.22 21:05, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
 * This page splitting is also very inconveinent on slow mobile devices. Pages take a long time to load one way or another.  I think it should be kept all on one page, but in the same format the past snapshots are in. 99.239.233.16 02:14, 17 January 2014 (UTC)


 * If you just want to see what's coming in the next version, you can look at the 1.8 page. If you just want to view the changes in the latest snapshot, you can view the "a" snapshot for the week. The others will usually only be bug fixes.
 * Mobile is a driving factor for splitting the snapshots up, as a single page containing sometimes more than 10 rather large versions on it is much too big. Take for instance the 14 mostly large snapshots for 1.7.2, do you really want all that on a single page? Every version page has easy navigation to the versions relating to it in the infobox, so finding the pages is no issue.
 * For desktop, you have tabs so you can quite easily just open all the versions you want to look at in separate tabs and it's not much slower than viewing them on a single page (and subsequent visits will certainly be faster).
 * If you don't come here often, you may find it more convenient to be flooded with all the versions at once (assuming you're able to load the page in a reasonable time to begin with), however for people that frequent the page and just want to see the latest, they would find it more convenient to just view the version they want, rather than have to view every version every time. This shows that having both would be desirable, and having each snapshot on a separate page gives us the possibility to do that, by transcluding them all into a "view all" page.


 * Merging the snapshots into a single page is certainly not out of the question (that's the whole point of this format only applying to 1.8 versions, so we can make sure it's right before we apply it to previous versions and other editions), but I won't be doing it until after 1.8 comes out so it has time to be properly evaluated. –Matt ᐸ <small style=display:inline-block;line-height:9px;vertical-align:-3px>Talk Contribs ⎜ 03:16, 17 January 2014 (UTC)


 * IMHO Bring back the old format. Clicking each Snapshot one per one is a pain in the ass. If you want to split it, then per version but not per snapshot. 79.242.150.60 13:36, 17 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Is faster, easier and more organized to have a page per version, but not snapshot. If people wants to see what's new at Minecraft, it's better to have one page to see what's up. If they have to open every single snapshot page, it will be a pain in the ass, and more laggy in slow computers because they will have to open lots of pages to see information that should be in a single page. And, do you want to work more, making individual pages, instead of easily edit the page. Just think.--The Wither Steve (talk) 17:37, 18 January 2014 (UTC)


 * That's pretty much what the new system is. If you just want to see what's in the next release version, we have the main version page (e.g., 1.8). You only need to look at each snapshot page if you want to find out which exact version something changed in. -- Orthotopetalk 19:18, 18 January 2014 (UTC)


 * I too raise my voice in favour of the old page, or at the very least a combined page for snapshots-per-release-version. As it stands now, it is a pain in the arse to collect the relevant info from the distributed pages (already at half a dozen for pre1.8 alone). You mention going directly to the 1.8 page, which brings me to other points: 1) I don't think it can be taken for granted that some feature in a weekly isn't removed again before release, so that transient info has then to be dropped from the final 1.8 page resulting in potential loss of information about the weekly and/or 2) two versions of data have to be maintained up until the actual release, double-double-checking for new/obsolete/wrong information. –Preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.217.62.149 (talk)&#32;16:31, 23 January 2014‎(UTC). Please sign your posts with


 * Whether you care about each individual change in a snapshot or just want what's coming in the release, you still only need to look at one page. The a release of the week for the former, and 1.8 for the latter. Even if you also want to see the few bug fixes in the other releases, it's only matter of having to load what? 2 or sometimes even *gasp* 3 pages?! The one use case I can think of where "pain in the arse" isn't a gross exaggeration is if you want to look at the details for all the snapshots. You'd only need to do this the first time, so it's not the end of the world, but it's certainly a valid use and that's why a combined page will be available in addition to the separated pages. However I'm hesitant to add it now because internet users are very much creatures of habit, and will usually flock to the familiar before giving anything different a chance, especially if it requires them to change their workflow. Since this is the test run, feedback is important, and if there's an alternative everyone will just ignore this and we'll either be left stuck with the mess we had originally or we'll just have to guess what is the best option, then deal with the hordes of angry people after. I'd rather get it right the first time.
 * 1.8 isn't there to inform you about the changes in all the snapshots, it's about what is expected to be in the next release. If a feature is added then removed in snapshots, it's completely irrelevant to the 1.8 release. There's no loss of information because if you really want to go into individual details, the snapshot pages are still there. This is no different to how this worked before, the snapshots are just separate pages now and 1.8 is just a replacement for Upcoming features. Double information has always been maintained and is unavoidable without hugely complicating how pages are edited. –Matt ᐸ <small style=display:inline-block;line-height:9px;vertical-align:-3px>Talk Contribs ⎜ 01:56, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

What happened to the itemized list of changes per snapshot?
That was the whole reason I'd visit this page after snapshots/updates were released. Any chance this will be brought back or does anyone have any suggestions for other places to look?

Mojang says some of their changes, but not always all of them explicitly (saying bs like "and a lot of other things!") –Preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.176.146.186 (talk)&#32;15:31, 18 January 2014(UTC). Please sign your posts with


 * We actually should bring back the original page, instead of this splitted page :/--The Wither Steve (talk) 17:42, 18 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Putting all the snapshots on one page again is not an option. At its worst, this page was over 300kB of wikicode, nearly 700kB of HTML; that's simply too large and too slow to load or edit. As Matt said above, a page combining the snapshots leading up to each release version is a possibility. -- Orthotopetalk 19:18, 18 January 2014 (UTC)


 * yeah if updates are gonna be split into seperate pages now, do it PER VERSION, doing it per snapshot is just a pain in the ass. Adam 27 (talk) 22:08, 4 February 2014 (UTC)


 * in addition,if the driving force behind this is for mobile users,im 100% sure forcing someone to open several tabs forms a much bigger problem than loading times on a mobile device 66.115.89.11 22:13, 4 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Who's forcing you to open multiple tabs? That's merely a convenience on desktop to view pages faster. On mobile you would just open the page you want to view, and if you want to look at something else you open that after you've finished with the current page. It's faster than opening a single gigantic page every time, most of which you won't read. –Matt ᐸ <small style=display:inline-block;line-height:9px;vertical-align:-3px>Talk Contribs ⎜ 02:02, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Page layout
I know it's not nice of me to complain, but! Guys, changing layout of the page every few hours is kinda annoying. I used to track the content via various addons, so I'd be notified whenever info about new snapshot became available. But for the last few weeks nothing but false alarms comes out. Just make a few versions in subpages/sandbox, hold a poll to decide which one you like the most, and make up your minds already. Please! 46.42.18.81 12:08, 9 February 2014 (UTC)


 * I think it is decided now, the main thing is not everyone knows everything you can do in wiki code, so each person kept adding a better idea. --KnightMiner (talk 15:20, 9 February 2014 (UTC)