Like considering most (or all?) of three/addons/* as {experimental | alpha | beta} and not restricting breaking changes there to major version updates.
This would be nice but if this were to happen I’d think there should be a distinction between “addons” that are versioned and “example” files which are wild west. The reality of it is that people treat and rely on addons as part of the versioned library. If the goal is to be able to specify a version and get patch or minor releases automatically then if classes like OrbitControls or GLTFLoader incur breaking changes they shouldn’t be automatically updated with a patch release because core didn’t change.
Anyway just some thoughts.
There have been 140+ different major versions of three, and a handful of minor I believe.
Yeah my only point was that even following a “semver” model every monthly version of three.js should be major because it’s breaking. Patches are made when hotfixes are made immediately after a new version.