Cut a release for Flatpak, etc.

[jacksongoode]

In order for us to publish to Flathub #141 we need a real semantically versioned release, something that should have been tackled a while ago 😆.

My gut says we just start with 1.0.0 and increment the patch number from there? Maybe it would be good to have an action to do this automatically. @Insprill @TheEvilSkeleton @jpochyla

[TheEvilSkeleton]

I agree. Otherwise, if you think it's not production ready, then we could start with experimental releases.

[Insprill]

A major version > 0 indicates a stable application, which psst is not. If we switch to semantic versioning, we'll start at 0.1.0. I haven't used Flatpak before; does it not let us use a git hash for a version? If we are to switch to semantic versioning, I'd like to hear @jpochyla's thoughts.

[jpochyla]

Personally I'd prefer 0.1.0, yes.

[TheEvilSkeleton]

does it not let us use a git hash for a version?

Flatpak (the format) does, but Flathub (the store) prefers semantic versioning

[jacksongoode]

I'm good with 0.1.0 - I can close this issue and we can go ahead?

[TheEvilSkeleton]

You have my approval