Need standard for naming libraries which implement protocol versions about semver.org HOT 4 CLOSED

I think this is primarily a documentation problem. As a library evolves and changes, documentation should be kept up to date and made clear where the protocol boundaries lie. It's a hard problem to solve with something as simple as version numbers.

from semver.org.

I see what you're saying; I wasn't arguing that the semantic should be just within the version number. Rather that semver is the first sort of general guidance on packaging that I've seen w/ traction, and it seems a fairly natural place to provide more broad guidance. Not to say what a name should be, but perhaps what it shouldn't be. :-)

from semver.org.

Do you have any concrete ideas on this concept? If you could sketch out some guidelines that made sense, that would be something to at least start a discussion around.

from semver.org.

[originating organization]-[language/name]-[protocol], specifically precluding numbers in the name, and requiring a readme explanation of which versions are supported?

e.g. simplegeo-python-oauth
dsallings-python-github

from semver.org.