> What will most likely happen is that there with be large subsets of Bevy users who never use a formally stable Bevy codebase, and then leave for something dif

> What will most likely happen is that there with be large subsets of Bevy users who never use a formally stable Bevy codebase, and then leave for something different, because there are no guarantees. But naming it 1.0 won't give them guarantees either. If it's assumed, it would just be annoying when breakages do occur. What you're really asking for (it sounds like) is for there to be less breakages or longer term releases .. and that's a staffing issue imo. If users avoid it because they don't want churn, and the devs are choosing churn - then everyone is in agreement currently, no? The bevy devs are writing software in a way that fits them currently, and users who prefer to wait for 1.0 are doing so currently. Everyone gets as advertised. Do you see it working differently?