I know it's comestic change, but I think that keeping different version numbers can be confusing for final users. For example in ubuntu gnome: they mix packages from different gnome versions and the conclusion for many users -and sometimes you can see that in the media too- is that they don't have a clean implementation of gnome (which in fact used to be right): old nautilus version here, new gnome-x package there... I know there's no kde version of Solus atm, but better be prepared for the future? Just my opinion, but I understand if you prefeer to keep it in it's actual state.

I do prefer to keep it this way. I am preparing for the future by minimising the burden of maintaining 150 packages through unnecessary updates every few weeks.

Updates to the KF5 series (5.32.0 versions), Plasma series (5.9.5 versions), KDE Apps (17.04.1 series) should pretty much be left to one person (currently that's me). There is a correct order to doing them and many have to be built together and I know which ones can be skipped. If there's actual content updates I miss, then I'll happily have it pointed out to me on IRC so I can improve the system. The full lot gets updated on major version updates as it will pull in any minor translation updates even when there's no other changes.

Those are perfectly understable reasons, and I really appreciate that you took the time to explaining them. Thanks.