I recognize that this might be a PITA, but for me there is no easy way out of problems related to major versioning, and the clear answer is sticking with version 0.x.x for a considerate amount of time.
It seems people rush to publish version 1.0 (or 2.0, etc.) of their libraries, when they'd be better off just sticking with version 0.x.
It's not like that a package isn't ready for production because it is < 1.0. It might as well be. If you're an early adopter, I'd say that is even welcome: you're aware that its API might chance, that its quite new, etc. It gives more confidence than a package with version 7.x (at least in informing you that it's prone to changes, and allowing you to make an informed choice), IMHO.
It seems people rush to publish version 1.0 (or 2.0, etc.) of their libraries, when they'd be better off just sticking with version 0.x.
It's not like that a package isn't ready for production because it is < 1.0. It might as well be. If you're an early adopter, I'd say that is even welcome: you're aware that its API might chance, that its quite new, etc. It gives more confidence than a package with version 7.x (at least in informing you that it's prone to changes, and allowing you to make an informed choice), IMHO.