Create a discussion on versioning

[jeanas]

Move content on versioning schemes from
distributing-packages-using-setuptools.rst to a new discussion on versioning, and update it.

This is the continuation of #1450.

---

📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://python-packaging-user-guide--1455.org.readthedocs.build/en/1455/discussions/versioning/

[chrysle]

Looks good, thanks! Probably mention a few projects that comply with the different versioning systems?

[webknjaz]

@jeanas the first round of review complete.

[jeanas]

Looks good, thanks! Probably mention a few projects that comply with the different versioning systems?

Good idea; done. (I've used Sphinx, NumPy and pip.)

[jeanas]

Thanks for the detailed comments! I've revised much of the page, please take another look.

[chrysle]

Could you add an own paragraph for ZeroVer?

[jeanas]

Could you add an own paragraph for ZeroVer?

It's a satire, not a serious thing :)

[chrysle]

I know, it would be to warn users. Maybe that's stupid.

[jeanas]

@sinoroc Sorry, I don't understand your comment at all. What “things” are less clear-cut in the new document?

[webknjaz]

I wonder whether there is a risk people come to complain because we "bless" things that they don't like

That's literally the story of the Python Packaging in the nutshell 😂

[webknjaz]

I think adding a 0ver remark might be fun, just don't pass judgement..

[jeanas]

• Added references to blog posts on SemVer's weaknesses
• Added link to https://0ver.org

I think the only unresolved issue right now is #1455 (comment)

[webknjaz]

@jeanas I stumbled upon an article by Seth. Maybe it could be linked from somewhere too: https://sethmlarson.dev/pep-440.

[jeanas]

@webknjaz I've addressed the latest review.

[webknjaz]

Thanks 🙏