Interesting. Being based on publicly available information, it's not 100% accurate and I don't necessarily agree with all of the assessments here, but it is definitely helpful to see how the public state of the project looks when taken in aggregate. 1. No candidate. We have a new candidate in the works right now, but don't have anything to share other than that we are working on it. 2. Because of the approach we used, real stores are using it today even though it is incomplete. Work is moving slowly currently, but will resume at pace once we have our new candidate in place. 3. There's an argument to be made that we should have started with the hard stuff first, or at least got to it faster, but viability isn't a concern. Porting the more complex interface may create more churn in the new admin, but I don't think anyone is worried that building them isn't possible. As the project is pre-1.0, churn isn't that big of a deal. I'd also push back on this framing:

[...] I've always known about the famous Solidus vs Spree drama [...]

While collaboration between the projects eventually broke down and some of us are critical of how Spree has been run since the fork, there really wasn't ever a particular "drama". After the split the projects collaborated directly for a while, especially around security issues that affected both projects. Shifts in project strategy and the changeover in people handling this project caused those communication lines to break down. The only real "drama" is just that they use Solidus projects as case studies on the Spree site.