Comment 7 for bug 1419695

We're unlikely to ship a solution within a week, however we can likely hammer out what solution we're going to go with and probably land something in trunk so that Ubuntu isn't different/broken it's just ahead of the curve.

I wish y'all had reached out to us so we could have prioritized the issue, it looks like this was decided to happen ~4 months ago which would have been a great time to come to us and say that Ubuntu needs a solution to this issue by X date. We haven't made a lot of progress on the issue because it's a thorny issue with a lot of far reaching complications and while it should be fixed it's at least not flat out broken and the current behavior as well understood. At the same time there were other, lower hanging fruit which were places where there were actual broken pieces of behavior.

A side comment by someone who wasn't involved in the change is not a great way to find out that Ubuntu broke a fairly major use case by default, especially given that there's only a week or so to figure out a good solution before the feature freeze. It's obviously too late to do anything about it in this case besides us (pip) change gears and try to quickly hammer out a solution in time. However I would suggest that things will be better for everyone involved if engaging upstream is treated as the first step to these things and is done early in the process instead of being done after the fact, if at all. Doing it the other way makes upstreams like myself feel like we have to try and monitor all of the downstream distributors for breaking changes to try and protect our users.