That's a very fair point, that's why I had to mention the whole "(as well as some issues in general)" thing as well. For example, if software works in a config

That's a very fair point, that's why I had to mention the whole "(as well as some issues in general)" thing as well. For example, if software works in a configuration that was setup correctly (according to their own instructions) in version #1 and after update the version #2 makes the setup no longer work, is that a bug? I'd probably say it is, unless the patch notes clearly instruct that something needs to be done, though even that can be debatable. What about the case where you don't even consent to install some package that will take up a port on your OS and break something else, but it silently gets pulled in through some update? There's probably nuance to it all. At the end of the day, as a user, I might subjectively not even care about the internal workings behind some abstraction and the many reasons behind it, but rather about how it should work in a reasonable configuration - if a web server refuses to start if it cannot resolve a domain that it's supposed to reverse proxy when starting up, even though the other 19 out of 20 could be proxied, is that a bug? Probably not, but it sure seems pretty darn broken, since those 19 could be served and the faulty domain simply checked later. Of course, the software itself doesn't care about the user either, so at the end of the day it is the user who needs to learn patience and to trudge through the docs, posts online and other sources to hopefully resolve the issues, even if it's a bunch of weird workarounds or concessions, no matter how frustrating they might be. But hey, there's nothing wrong with documenting said frustrations or issues. I am glad that you've embraced a more neutral mindset, though!