> They already put it into production though, so that's not very relevant to deciding when they move off of it.
It's one of those "if a tree falls in the woods" scenarios, though. It's not a default-install package.
People who selected it already dealt with it or keep running into it. Changing the backend won't even affect them; config edits are preserved.
To add (one final poor point): they're a tiny minority! This production is like... nothing.
Fixing it/changing course/introducing 'breakage' (a correction) is less adversarial than leaving it broken IMO.
There were several ways to approach this, some more user visible than others...
The 'proper' thing, changing the backend, would've been felt. Patching the errant argument use was also entirely an option. They even had several actual LTS' to do this in!
The 'service life', like the cake, is a lie. While we debate best practices - they fail to execute them!
I appreciate you putting up with my rambling though