It is unfortunate how far behind we are in versions. We follow debian which hasn't been updated in a bit. I was thinking about updating the package there, but I need to fix the fires here first (and if I update debian to the latest without handling this bug's issue, I will break people's server).
I am definitely interested in updating rabbitmq-server to 3.13, however we do not often update major versions because they are prone to breaking things (hence, this bug report). If anything, I would consider making a new binary `rabbitmq-server-3.13` similar to how say, gcc-13 does it. That way users can upgrade to the new version but it's more of an informed decision rather than things just breaking upon an `apt update && apt upgrade`.
Even if we stay on top of it, users might not `apt update && apt upgrade` for an extended period of time, and then we would have to deal with that.
You are on point, I was also thinking about the potential of snaps long term.
Great points Hadmut.
It is unfortunate how far behind we are in versions. We follow debian which hasn't been updated in a bit. I was thinking about updating the package there, but I need to fix the fires here first (and if I update debian to the latest without handling this bug's issue, I will break people's server).
I am definitely interested in updating rabbitmq-server to 3.13, however we do not often update major versions because they are prone to breaking things (hence, this bug report). If anything, I would consider making a new binary `rabbitmq- server- 3.13` similar to how say, gcc-13 does it. That way users can upgrade to the new version but it's more of an informed decision rather than things just breaking upon an `apt update && apt upgrade`.
Even if we stay on top of it, users might not `apt update && apt upgrade` for an extended period of time, and then we would have to deal with that.
You are on point, I was also thinking about the potential of snaps long term.