There may be plenty of corner cases in which things don't work as expected, or after an upgrade stop working as they previously did. Users may have issues because they don't use the software correctly, or are unaware that the new version of their favorite tool requires changes on their part.
Obviously "X in tool Y doesn't work, please fix tool Y" is not a question suitable for GIS.SE – this should go to whoever maintains the software in question.
But if we consider questions about usage or features of specific products to be in scope, then I'd consider questions like these to be legitimate as well:
- X doesn't work in tool Y [optionally: doesn't work in version Z and it worked in the previous version], is this a bug or am I doing something wrong? Provided the OP has consulted the product's FAQ and documentation prior to posting, we don't really know how long-lived the solution is going to be. It may be a bug that gets fixed a few weeks later, or the OP is indeed doing something wrong.
- X doesn't work in tool Y, which seems to be a bug, how can I work around it?
I'm rather skeptical about rating questions based on their perceived "longevity" (and even more about the formula "related to a bug = short-lived"): Some products also have long-standing bugs which don't get fixed for a long time – in this case, the answer will be relevant for a long time. Also, not everyone is always using the latest version of a product: Large organizations often take a long time to roll out a new version, upgrading commercial software is a budget issue, and the more stable Linux distributions (such as LTS versions of Ubuntu) roll out only security fixes and minor bug fixes, keeping the rest for the next release. And eventually, a lot of questions related to technology (which make up a fair share of SE) will become obsolete as the technology in question evolves.