If you are using arch and do not subscribe to the rss feed, then it is on you. As described here: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/System_maintenance#Upgrading_the_system

deleted by creator

Performance is not the goal, but cleaner code and more manageable code. But both will ultimately lead to better performance. As of now it was basically impossible to change something in the database structure since it was hard to estimate the impact of it.

… and may also break compatibility with previous 10.Y releases if required for later cleanup work.

If you read through the whole paragraph, it is clear that they mean the compatibility of previous jellyfin versions.

Also, again:

Note however that the 10.Y.Z release chain represents the “cleanup” of the codebase, so it should be accepted that 10.Y.Z breaks all compatibility,

That means that the code is not cleaned up with that release.

If you would release 11 before the code is considered cleaned up, you would basically break your own defined versioning convention. That is best decided by the active maintainers.

Consider the 10.y.z simply to be 0.y.z and everything works out.

Jellyfin inherited a lot of shitty code and architecture from emby. They simply cannot guarantee anything across patches until it is sorted out.

imho much better then releasing major version after major version because the break stuff regularly.

Also for internal use. The original emby source used not within the code base standardized database access.

Basically changes to the database were not possible since finding references across the code base which part uses which values was impossible.

Note however that the 10.Y.Z release chain represents the “cleanup” of the codebase, so it should be accepted that 10.Y.Z breaks all compatibility,

Its right there at the link you posted.

Tailscale offers way more then just wireguard. ACLs, NAT traversal etc. etc.

While some use cases can be replaced with traditional wireguard, others not.

No. The point is the performance. You cannot compare the number of cores or frequency or else across architectures. That is pointless. That is not what i have said at all.

Can you specify which CPUs you are talking about? Also we are not talking about cores. “Halving cores” means basically nothing when you compare across different architectures.

That is actually somewhat usual, isn’t it? Just compared previous gens high end with entry to mid on nvidia like 1080 vs 3060 and 2080 vs 4060. They paint the same picture.

We are far away from the times where every single generation, marks a significant performance increase. For CPU or GPU performance.