As the RFC email clearly explains, they were experimenting, restarted multiple times and to go quite deep into it until they got to a point where this was worth announcing as something that might be worthwhile to merge.
Yeah. I’ve done this in the past. The first few attempts are about learning where the pain points are and to get ideas about what a good way to structure the patch set might look like.
Edit: obviously not at this scale. 2300 patches at once in a fork is a lot.
Well at this point i think it’s good work but now that the change is identified as good and fairly concrete - it’s still likely a benefit to break it up into smaller more reviewable chunks to take in over time. Maybe by major subsystem so their expert maintainers can take closer looks at it.
