i believe that design pressure sense is a form of taste, and like taste it needs to be cultivated, and that is can't be easily verbalized or measured. you just know that your architecture is going to have advantageous properties, but to sit down and explain why will take inordinate amount of effort. the goal is to be able to look at the architecture and be able to see its failure states as it evolves through other people working with it, external pressures, requirement changes, etc. over the course of 2, 3, ... 10, etc. years into the future. i stay in touch with former colleagues from projects where i was architect, just so that i can learn how the architecture evolved, what were the pain points, etc.

i've met other architects who have that sense, and it's a joy to work with them, because it is vibing. conversly "best practices or bust" sticklers are insufferable. i make sure that i don't have to contend with such people.

For me, the key moment is when Hynek politely disses SQLModel without ever speaking its name. He’s built his conceptual framework enough to have earned the gentle dismantling when it arrives.

(However alluring it may seem, and despite how much I admire the work that has gone into it, I’ve always felt that SQLModel is an implementation of a “wrong” idea. I suspect it will lead its users astray as their system grows.)