> And, in turn, you appear to be oblivious to the point - the release cadence of this best-case scenario still means like a decade between updates to the project.

It doesn't seem you are managing to think the issue all the way through. Even if you believe you can claim that release cadence is a factor, C++26 is the latest release in a process that outputs a new version every two years. Therefore, your argument would lead you to agree that there is a greater need for maintenance as there are more releases still evolving.

> C++26 was released 4months ago; pointless to update it until compilers and deps are updated.

This is a silly argument to make. At best you are trying to argue that you somehow believe maintenance needs aren't as urgent. Except urgency is irrelevant to the discussion, and the whole argument is derived from specious reasoning to begin with.

It sounds like you are fully invested in contrarianism and not invested at all in thinking about the issue you are trying to discuss. This is not the best use of anyone's time.