matchboxbananasynergy We are currently dealing with resolving a lot [emphasis mine] of upstream issues to ensure that everything is smooth for everyone, so I appreciate your patience in the meantime.
This situation shows why project people, need to stop criticizing users who wish to not update automatically, but instead want to ensure that updates are reliably defect-free before rebooting an update that cannot be rolled back. Updating is a user policy decision, equal to (not) running Play Store components as a user policy and a user threat model decision.
I am unfamiliar with GrapheneOS's automated test suite and checklist before release. Is there a place I can find that, and maybe even contribute? All the descriptions of release testing I have seen only seem to refer to something that sounds rather ad-hoc. What am I missing?
As a GrapheneOS donor I dislike the repeated finger pointing at and blaming of "upstream". The use of AOSP was a deliberate and fundamental/core choice for GrapheneOS base. It is GrapheneOS, not AOSP which supposedly tests the whole package, proceeding through Alpha-Beta-Final release phases. Own the decision and the release software please. I don't see Linux distros repeatedly blaming upstream for defects in software they release, nor should it be that way. Accept responsibility as well as deserved accolades.
If am personally glad to wait patiently until I feel a release which I cannot uninstall will not break my daily use phone, and support getting it right rather than rushing defects out the door. Thanks for explaining where you're at.