Indeed - this is why you need the process scaffolding all this so that the blast radius of the change is well-understood, and documented by the ECO-equivalent you release with the backported fix, along with the changelog entry that highlights the relevant risk in brief.
If you don't have that, then all you're doing is asserting that some changes are necessary, and thus that the risk of breakage must be accepted by users because, in your opinion, the risk they take on by not taking the change is unacceptably high.
Personally, I suspect we've ended up in the place we're in because we've taken the process needed for a proper LTS release, removed the bits that are hard work like ECOs, planning a change, comparing the change to the plan etc, and left ourselves with the bits that are easier to do, but not that helpful.
此内容由惯性聚合(RSS阅读器)自动聚合整理，仅供阅读参考。 原文来自 — 版权归原作者所有。