[phoe-krk]

> Here’s the problem: people interpret SemVer as permission to make breaking changes.

So, it isn't SemVer that is a mistake. It's the author's opinion that software should always be fully backwards-compatible, which would then require all SemVer-using software to be version 1.x.x (or 0.x.x, if we're zero-indexing.)

Or, alternatively, if SemVer didn't exist, this post would probably skip it altogether and just complain about people breaking backwards compatibility anyway.

> To say it another way: If you need to make a breaking change to your API, it means you screwed up. Don’t screw up.

If you make mistakes, please don't make mistakes instead. News at 11.

[eYrKEC2]

I agree. SemVer doesn't give you permission to make breaking changes -- it documents your decisions, assuming you're honest with SemVer.

This is very very useful. You can look at a library or dependency and weigh out if frequent, breaking changes are ok for you or not -- is the value worth the pain? Alternatively, if the major version never changes, you can have more confidence that you won't have to rework your code on every library update.