Sorry, but I can't agree.
I'd rate a bug as certainly serious when it affects more than 90% of the users.
I have no proof for the >90%, just a guess and this is no rating or devaluing of right-to-left writing folks.
The bug, as I understand, breaks MTEXT even for existing drawings.
This will raise a bunch of issues with the new release, not only for us, but also for Linux distribution maintainers upgrading their repos.
Users request changes to reduce 4-click commands to 3-clicks or less for more efficiency. What will they do when they have to fiddle around with text alignment by trial and error to get a reasonable result for printing?
And workaround drawings, created with 2.2.1, have to be fixed for 2.2.2 again. Sound serious to me too.
We reached a new quality with the 2.2.0 release and it will be disappointing when we step back again.
Maybe we have to consider a better review process then to avoid having lower-quality pull request merged without sufficient review and testing. Once merged, the bad code get out of focus and hides in the huge code base, making it hard to debug and fix later.
It's our responsibility to take care of fixing bad pull requests or even decline them, when the concept is wrong or bad.
investing less than half an hour into Search function can save hours or days of waiting for a solution