> Due to our size, we don’t need any kind of backwards compatibility, we just update everything.
Then just use 0.y.z versions and be done with it?
If the library constantly changes and everybody expects that, then that seems fitting.
I like Go's major version handling very much. If it's backwards incompatible, it's basically a new library under the same name and development team.
In my opinion making major version updates so painful also incentivizes not making backwards incompatible changes in libraries, which results in the Go ecosystem being very stable overall (something I value a lot in my day-to-day).
Then just use 0.y.z versions and be done with it?
If the library constantly changes and everybody expects that, then that seems fitting.
I like Go's major version handling very much. If it's backwards incompatible, it's basically a new library under the same name and development team.
In my opinion making major version updates so painful also incentivizes not making backwards incompatible changes in libraries, which results in the Go ecosystem being very stable overall (something I value a lot in my day-to-day).