> Support only options aren't going to cut it in our experience; but maybe that'll be different with Python.

That's totally fair, and I can only speak from the sidelines. I haven't had a chance to review the architecture - would it possibly make sense to swap from async as a free feature to the process pool, and make async a pro feature? This would help with adoption from other OSS projects, if that's a goal, as the transition from Celery would then be moving from a process pool to a process pool (for most users). The vast, vast majority of Python libraries are not async-friendly and most still rely on the GIL. On the other hand, Celery has absolutely no asyncio support at all, which sets the pro feature apart.

On the other hand, already released and as you said it's much harder to take a free feature and make it paid.

Thanks again for Oban - I used it for a project in Elixir and it was painless. Missing Oban was why I made Chancy in the first place.

> The vast, vast majority of Python libraries are not async-friendly and most still rely on the GIL. On the other hand, Celery has absolutely no asyncio support at all, which sets the pro feature apart.

That's great advice. Wish we'd been in contact before =)