We messed up a month ago with a regression, we fixed the problem within a day and we rolled out a new version. The fact that you decided not to remove the redundant id attribute "because I don't want to set a precedent for accounting for every minor release of every library" and it caused problems with those unlucky enough to not be able to access the new release hardly makes me feel sympathetic to you that you are being blamed for the crash. Sure, it was within your rights to leave the id attribute in, because it is valid according to the standard, but standing on your rights doesn't exactly help people who's software is crashing all around their heads.
The fact remains, we screwed up. Actually, I'd go so far as to say that I screwed up, being the one who made the regression in question. I screwed up, we fixed the bug within a day of discovery, we then made a new release. You diagnosed the bug exactly as being related to an id attribute on a filter primitive, you evaluated whether to work around it, you decided against it, SUSE users got pissed off. In situations like this where you have users to satisfy, making two blogs about the bug a month apart making it look like you are currently waiting for us to pull our thumbs out of our arses is hardly fair when you had the means to avoid the bug to begin with.
I'm not against people mentioning problems with librsvg, I don't think librsvg is bug free and I don't think anyone else does either. I simply think that mentioning a single, minor bug twice on your blog, the first time in great detail is unrepresentitive of our firm commitment to fixing bugs.