> with a similar timeline, moved to RISC-V RVA22+V. Look how long it takes them to bump their software releases. And you want to throw an entirely new architec

> with a similar timeline, moved to RISC-V RVA22+V. Look how long it takes them to bump their software releases. And you want to throw an entirely new architecture in the mix? Why? I don't understand how you can be shocked by the decision to stick with what works and sells (very well). Which of their goals would be furthered by taking this significant risk?