Weird, I never saw v0.13b.54 type verion numbering before. I saw v0.2a, though. Usually, the higher the number, the higher the version is, though, but some people update the number every bugfix

Yeah it's set by the person's decision. I personally just do v1.0. However some more complex softwares like Firefox goes with more complex version numbers too. I think it also depends how often a software public/private download is updated.

I think people just choose the version numbers
eg Warcraft III v1.24d patch had some random numbers after it
so did v1.24e.
mostly people refer by the number with letter not v1.24.3.6384 (v1.24e)
Also they can choose build numbers
basically when they make a big change they make a larger increment to the number, a small change make a smaller increment

An example would be my poker game for the TI-nspire.
It's currently at 0.9.7 because I know there are some inconstiencies with the play of the game (it doesn't match the official rules)
I started from 0.1 and worked up, with minor changes then versions would be like 0.8.1 0.8.2 etc

Ah, and that reminds me: The perfect example of exactly what not to do is TI's use of TI-8x, where the x is an arbitrary number picked for no particular reason

EDIT: It gets even more complicated when you take the 73, 76.fr, and 92 into account

Yeah, calc naming is pretty random too. Casio calcs: the first ones were:
1.  fx-7000G, fx-6000G, fx-6500G, fx-7200G, fx-7500G, fx-8000G, fx-8500G.
2.  Then newer ones (but still old): fx-7700G, fx-7700GB, fx-8700G, fx-8700GB
3.  fx-7700GE, fx-9700GE, fx-9800G, fx-9900G
4.  then 7400 series (7400 and variations)
5.  The 9850 (or 9x50) series (9850, 9750, 9950, 9970)
This is confusing because even though there are games that say are for the 9x50 series, this includes the 9970.
6.  Finally the current calc FX-9860 (and different versions such as FX-9860GII)
As you can see there are random numbers everywhere

If you want to put version numbers for your own programs, I have my personal opinion but the choice is yours.
I like to start from 0.1 and on the way not to have the numbers any more complex than this: .x E.g.: 0.8.3
however if it is a big project then i can use more complex version numbers
But as I say, it's your choice, and basically version numbers are used to put them in order.

also relating to your question above...
V0.13B.54    0.13 version with a beta (or B) 0.54
V3.15A.12:   3.15 version with alpha (or A) 0.12
V1.1.4C.2443: 1.1.4version C? .2443
In my opinion the letters in the middle make it confusing, an example like v0.13.2.54 (2 representing B) or v3.15.1.12 might be better.


V0.2A 0.2 alpha
V1.3B 1.3 beta
These are ok

Overall, they are just used to classify big or small changes in the program.

[TI-nspire OSes are confusing too Eg:
1.1 [noncas] is actually 1.1.9253
2.1 is actually 2.1.0.631

True most of them are completely different, and several names!
French versions: 9750 - Graph 30,35,fx-8930GT;
9850,9950 - Graph 60,65,CFX-9930GT,9940,9960;
9970 - Graph 80
That would be so confusing to work out.
At least program version numbers are in order...

even though now it's a bit better EDIT: maybe not, it's still confusing with all the 9860 versions:
fx-9860G, fx-9860G SD, fx-9860G Slim, fx-9860GII, fx-9860GII SD,
SD means SD card
slim is a special version that can be folded in half
gii new version technology (but still can be hacked into the original 9860)

fx-9750GII, fx-7400GII these are just remade versions of the originals but with GII technology

And again there are french versions that have completely different names.

ooh i've just seen something.. there's the fx-CG series to be launched next year. Looks like it's the Prizm and again, more random names...
different countries different names
fx-CG10 (North America), fx-CG20

For TI-Boy SE, my versioning started with Alpha 0.0.1, and following versions with small bugfixes were Alpha 0.0.2 and Alpha 0.0.3.

The next version will probably be Alpha 0.1.0, because it has a completely new codebase.