> i *think* the even ones are considered LTS releases, not necessarily > that the odd ones are unstable
0.10.x being described as a stable-branch is about the meaning of "stable/unstable" that could be paraphrased as "doesn't change a lot/does change a lot" (just like the Debian stable and unstable suites). It is not about "works/doesn't work". 0.11.x works fine, and (in general) so does Debian unstable - but they are moving targets, with frequent changes, some of them large. If you follow the 0.11.x branch, you have to be prepared for the possibility that the upgrade from (for example) 0.11.3 to 0.11.4 might contain intrusive changes (a large diffstat, new features, perhaps new dependencies, perhaps an elevated risk of regressions). If it does, and it's too large a change for your distribution's stable release managers to be willing to apply it as a SRU, then subsequent releases from the 0.11.x branch would not be eligible for SRU either, even if they fix security vulnerabilities or other major bugs. Your only options would be to backport individual changes, or reconsider the policy for the size of changes that is acceptable; there would probably not be a 0.11.3.1 upstream release that you can import, because upstream will have moved on to later versions already. > starting at 0.11 simplifies the fact that the document-portal was ripped > out and moved to xdg-desktop-portal This is not directly relevant for Debian (and hence Ubuntu, if Ubuntu syncs versions from Debian), because in Debian I already did that transition with the move from Flatpak 0.10.3 to 0.10.4. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1750382 Title: please roll back to 0.10.x stable branch or confirm use of 0.11.x for bionic To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/flatpak/+bug/1750382/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
