> Well, its utility is only in "this version is considered immutable".
> The Ruby guys use a convention of 1.2.dev and the Java/Scala/Clojure
> guys (because they all share most of the same toolchain) use a
> convention of 1.2-SNAPSHOT.
>
> We could just do that. Users would expect a version of 1.2-SNAPSHOT to
> possibly change, while expecting that eventually an immutable 1.2
> would be released.

I guess I never understood self-imposed, artificial restrictions.  If
we want something not to change, then don't change it.  OTOH, if a
silly typo bug that went undiscovered appears in something that wasn't
intended to change, wouldn't it be ok to just fix that typo?

What's the use-case for needing absolute immutability, including
inability to fix a typo?  Security -- verifying a digitally signed
package is the only one I can come up with..  Is that it?