> IMHO, focus should be on accord-based MVs. Even if that means it's blocked > on first adding support for multiple conditions. > Strongly disagree here. We should develop features to be as loosely coupled w/one another as possible w/an eye towards future compatibility and leverage but not block development of one functionality on something else unless absolutely required for the feature to work (I'm defining "work" here as "hits user requirements with affordances consistent w/the rest of our ecosystem").
With the logic of deferring to another feature, it would have been quite reasonable for someone to make this same statement back in fall of '23 when we were discussing delaying 5.0 for Accord's merge. But things come up, the space we're in is complex, and cutting edge distributed things are Hard. On Thu, May 8, 2025, at 11:13 AM, Mick Semb Wever wrote: > > >> Curious what others think though. I'm +1 on the spirit of getting MVs to a >> stable point, but not convinced this is the best approach. >> > > > > > > IMHO, focus should be on accord-based MVs. Even if that means it's blocked > on first adding support for multiple conditions. >
