But if you use some Linux distribution, which includes thousands of packages, do you really read release notes for every package before upgrade?
If you're upgrading any user-configured *server* component that you depend on, and NOT reading the mailing list, documentation & release notes, that's NOT a Dovecot problem. or a Distro problem.
Re: communication:
Dovecot 2.4 was announced & release a long time ago. Along with the crystal-clear v2.3 EOL announcement -- effective **May 2025**,
https://dovecot.org/mailman3/archives/list/dovecot-news@dovecot.org/thread/3P45L76DOC3NKUNSSPIXQNKINGOCYH5K/'clear' from them does not mean ppl will like it. Was it a well-managed, clearly-documented, easy-to-implement transition? Nope. Or at least, not done as well as it could/should have been.
As for the Linux distros ... quite a few seem to be enjoying this 'fun'.
Fedora, e.g, made a choice to NOT release Dovecot v2.4 packages for Fedora 42, or v2.3 packages for Fedora 43; current availabilty is here
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/dovecotIf you updated Fedora 42 -> 43, you were then 'forced' to deal with the immediately 'broken' Dovecot installation, requiring the v2.3 -> v2.4 manual config update process. In many cases, clearly not 'smooth' ...
Forcing such a known-breaking change on users for a distro-packaged server component IN CONJUNCTION with a Distro release was a poor release implementation choice. Treating server apps like desktop apps usually is. They were told, repeatedly; they chose not to agree. Or respond. Their distro, their rules ...
To this day,
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Dovecot2.4soft-pedals the issue.
The solution here was to build own Dovecot 2.3 & 2.4 packages for Fedora 42 & 43 (or find another non-distro source). Then do the Fedora (or any other distro) upgrade ... independent of their 'forced' Dovecot version change.