Hacker News Reader

The clause allowing 0.x releases to contain breaking changes needs to go. Also, the first release should be v1; so many projects never leave 0.x despite being depended on by millions of projects and everytime they push a new minor all hell breaks loose as people have to manually look at the changelog and decide to upgrade.

View on HN

the first release should be v1

If this were done, how would v1 be any different than v0 is now? Isn't it nice that people who want to avoid all that hell breaking loose can simply not use a package that hasn't gotten to v1? Why would you want to do away with that?

I find it quite useful. I've been bitten before when a system (Carthage) explicitly decides to be 'semver except that part', for some reason.

All projects take a little while to stabilize, and this simply formalizes (the numbering of) that process. Any project can trivially opt out of it by simply starting with "1", as you suggest.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com