> As a critique the fact that developer experience is on the roadmap rather than thought about from the beginning is a little off-putting Implementing it is on

> As a critique the fact that developer experience is on the roadmap rather than thought about from the beginning is a little off-putting Implementing it is on the roadmap but that's no evidence that it hasn't been thought about extensively and for something like this you really -have- to think things out up front (it's more like a math proof than a CRUD app in a lot of ways) or you're going to find yourself with holes in both feet and a codebase you have to throw away and restart from scratch. From what I can see, they've been laser focused on getting the core to be correct by design, which will have required repeatedly gutting parts of it as conceptual mistakes are shaken out, so if you -wrote- the DX code as you were going rather than simply keeping in mind that the codebase needs to be amenable to it -being- written (and periodically thinking through how you'd do so as a sort of mental dry run) I'd expect the DX parts to have to be thrown away entirely, repeatedly, which is a motivation sink and in the best case scenario would've substantially slowed down getting the core right. But yeah, the key thing is "not yet implemented" and "hasn't been thought about at all" are very different things and I'd strongly suspect that my read of what was meant is more likely to be the right one given the nature of the project. (please take the above as "an explanation of why I suspect their actions are fine and their chosen trade-offs make sense" rather than "let me tell you why you're wrong" because you do have a point that if you don't keep DX in mind at all in the early stages the end result tend to be unhappy-making, and, well, let's just say I speak from repeated experience of doing that that to myself ;)