Would people actually expect w piece of software marked as version 0.0.0 to be anything more than a placeholder?
Would people actually expect w piece of software marked as version 0.0.0 to be anything more than a placeholder?
Starting at 0.0.1 is at least just as arbitrary as starting at 0.0.0, and your aversion to starting at 0.0.0 suggests you're making implicit assumptions about what the non-existent 0.0.0 means when starting at 0.0.1. But if 0.0.0 doesn't even exist then you can't really make any assumptions about it.
At least 0.0.0 is clearly the very first version of something. Starting at 0.0.1 doesn't make clear that there isn't an earlier 0.0.0.
I guess I don't really see version numbers as indexes but as cardinals, hence why leading zeroes seem weird to me.
For this reason, 0.x versions can make sense - they serve as a good flag for 'this is pre-release', because people expect version 1 to be the first released version.
In the real world everybody would just call a[0] "the first element of the array".
0.0.0 is kind of weird... for some reason it suggests to me that zero lines of code have been written so far. (If there was code, the version number would have been higher.) But this is obviously not the case here. I do wonder what versions they used before this release?
Then again, I know of at least one non-trivial project that used negative version numbers... I guess, in the end, it just means what the developers say it means.
0.0.0 is bizarre though.
I think they should use 0.0.1-pre instead of 0.0.0. The version 0.0.0 I would consider as "the development have not started yet".
> How should I deal with revisions in the 0.y.z initial development phase?
> The simplest thing to do is start your initial development release at 0.1.0 and then increment the minor version for each subsequent release.
Source: http://semver.org/#how-should-i-deal-with-revisions-in-the-0...
Oh If you would search SemVer repository on GitHub then there are some mentions about 0.0.0 [1]. It is interesting point of view but I prefer non-production versions ready as 0.x.y, where x is greater or equal to 1. So yes, the 0.1.0 is way more meaningful and I recommend it.
> This is a first alpha release
Alpha typically means feature complete, but untested and thus unsuitable for general release. You don't need to use good-looking version numbers for that.