I'm agreeing with you here for the first part: that's another great well-meaning dev explanation. The ball-dropping is sales/product/leadership not being align

I'm agreeing with you here for the first part: that's another great well-meaning dev explanation. The ball-dropping is sales/product/leadership not being aligned on user advocacy. "Our velocity & sales > breaking user environments" means either the former is overly prioritized, or the people making decisions are too far from users (developers) to understand their daily needs. Managing docker versions for dev/prod drift isn't "1% of devs 99% of the time" but "99% of devs 1% of the time", so it's a real miss. In an alternate org where the user advocates lead might look more like: * <reject early on the current feature plan proposal as user hostile and instead...> * free: default to auto-update (or not) * free: flip * pay ("Pro"): one-click to switch to another version, both forwards & backwards * pay ("Enterprise"): centrally managed update schedule, version tracking, audit logs, etc. for all devs in your org Folks there are some of the best, so I'm sure most of this was considered, and thus it's an org/process problem