[devonbleak]

There's definitely something to the "choose boring technology" approach. But to paraphrase Palahniuk "on a long enough timeline the survival rate for all technology is zero". Everything becomes tech debt.

If your solution makes it a decade that's a huge accomplishment - you got that abstraction fairly well nailed. Now think about all the systems you use that were written 10+ years ago and how clunky and painful they are and how you wonder why nobody upgrades this thing or replaces it with something more modern - that feels like tech debt, no?

Hanging your career on a single technology has risk - your bill rate is gonna plummet if the stack goes out of style and you don't move on, or as the market gets saturated with people that have enough skill with it. If the framework hangs on long enough your bill rate might go back up as companies get desperate to maintain the things built on it that they haven't managed to replace. It also has positives - you'll be very proficient with building things with it and likely know how to mitigate its limitations to get stuff done efficiently.