If you truly must (you mustn't), you could do (you shouldn't): v1.1-b20260101

>>108004871

File: 75b.jpg (269 KB, 859x960)

269 KB JPG

v6a31955

>>108004871
Might as well include the branch and commit too

File: 1761286521916430.png (36 KB, 270x380)

36 KB PNG

>>108004632
>1.1
>1.2
>2.0
>One
>One U
>One 2
>3.0
>Vista
>X
>11.0
>12.0
>26

1
2
3
4

if you're a library, you need to indicate breaking changes clearly, so semver. Everything else that isn't a dependency has no need whatsoever for anything more than the incrementing build number.

Everyone doing semver on an enduser app is a fucking idiot

>>108004632
Using the year is a poor idea if you aren't going to regularly update. It'll make people think your software is old and useless if they have to install 2015.05.12 in current year

File: dotdotdot.png (738 KB, 1080x1131)

738 KB PNG

>>108004632
>Pre-Alpha test v.0.0.1.0.0. [...] 0.0.03b nightly experimental

>>108004632
>v2026.01.01
This is good because it readily exposes how Linux distro maintainers keep you on years-outdated and insecure packages.

>>108004971
Came here to post this.

>>108004632
For me? It's zerover. You don't deserve a 1.0 unless the project is completely done, planning to port to another OS in 20 years? Ain't done yet.

File: 1767248314332380.png (57 KB, 335x327)

57 KB PNG

>>108007271
>It's zer over

File: unity .png (5 KB, 200x200)

5 KB PNG

>>108004632
>1
>2
>3
>4
>5
>2017
>2018
>2019
>2020
>2021
>2022
>2023
>6

>>108004632
v1.1? Wrong. v0.0.1.1.

>>108006377
that was my 18th birthday

>>108004632
>95
>2000
>2003
>XP
>VX
>Ace
>MV

>>108008112
Was it a good birthday?