Ok, so could we agree that then doubling down on even more breaking changes is likely to create more codebases stuck at these "evolutionary bottlenecks"? Whene

Ok, so could we agree that then doubling down on even more breaking changes is likely to create more codebases stuck at these "evolutionary bottlenecks"? Whenever I hear someone say - "Gee, the only path ahead is a breaking change, sorry charlie!", what I really hear is - "I gave up thinking up a solution on how to do it an evolutionary way and I am lazy and just want to declare a revolution!". There is always a pathway ahead on the evolutionary path. That's the premise at least.