The idea is that upgrading a devtool is like upgrading a vendored library. It's not something you do automatically or while you're in the middle of doing something else. Usually the AI can fix merge conflicts. If upstream changes are too extensive, you can have the AI rewrite the change entirely.

I think will work better for nice-to-have features that are ultimately disposable if they become too hard to maintain.

> I can see the allure of this line of thinking but I think it's sadly too idealistic.

I think it would be exhausting. Even if nothing broke, upstream UI changes could change your program daily. It makes a lot more sense for pulling changes that are security or bug fixes.

It seems like it would make sense for pulling enhanced functionality with no UI changes, but would you even use the enhanced functionality if you didn't even know it was there?

OTOH, I suppose if you organized your workstream correctly, you would always have previous binaries to fall back on.