- 0.0.1 -> improvements
- 0.1.0 -> breaking changes
- 1.0.0 -> overhaul/refactor needed
I know not every case is easy but this is my rule of thumb. I've honestly never needed a major version change
- 0.1.0 -> breaking changes
- 1.0.0 -> overhaul/refactor needed
I know not every case is easy but this is my rule of thumb. I've honestly never needed a major version change
- x.y.Z (patch) -> backward compatible bug fixes
- x.Y.z (minor) -> backward compatible new features
- X.y.z (major) -> breaking changes
But of course it's fine to use whatever versioning scheme you like, as long as you communicate it to your consumers.
Edit: updated the version strings for clarity.
0.1.0 - I rearchitected the bug
1.0.0 - The bug is integral to the codebase.