Just an observation that most of your advantages (4/5) are for the developers and their process of doing work. Choosing an architecture based on your ease of w

Just an observation that most of your advantages (4/5) are for the developers and their process of doing work. Choosing an architecture based on your ease of working seems fine, until you need to engineer that architecture to be fault-tolerant, scale, etc. (not saying what you are doing isn't fault-tolerant, etc.) That is where micro-services and distributing your architecture can introduce more failure points in the underlying infrastructure than with a monolith. It all depends on the problems being solved. My hope is people will architect a system based on the business needs as the primary factor and nice-to-haves would include making your work flow easier or trying new shiny things out.