To me, the most important metric of the quality of a code is whether it is useful and solves problems faced by some part of the community.
If it indeed solves problems and provides new features people want, then I will regard it as good code, even if they use _ and __ as variable names (forgive me if this sounds a bit extreme to you). You can always iterate over the code from 1 to 2 to 3 and so on, but the most important step comes from 0 to 1, which I value the most.
When I crafted and merged the initial version of TVMScript ([RFC] Hybrid Script Support for TIR, https://github.com/apache/tvm/pull/6227) into TVM, the code I wrote is hard to say to be in satisfactory industrial quality (at least from my perspective) when I was only a 3-year undergrad and has little experience of research and engineering, and it has been substantially refactored since then by many other community members.
I would say TVMScript is still an optional module now because users can choose to use TVMScript if they are interested in it, or they can simply just ignore it without modifying any line of their codes. And I believe this can be a typical workflow for other optional modules, which is principally reflected by this RFC.
Actually I am a bit surprised by this RFC because I thought it was a de-facto existing develop work flow in TVM. AutoTVM, Ansor, MetaSchedule, TVMScript are all optional modules IMO. Even for the compilation module which lies in the core of TVM, users can choose to use te or TensorIR which provide two indepedent APIs to describe computation and schedules.
Maintenance is a typical engineering problem faced by many projects, many of which are 10x larger than TVM. I would say as long as it’s an engineering problem, it can be solved with strong and broad community users and developers, given the fact that there are many much larger and longstanding projects like Linux that are still under active maintenance.
The key to such success is that we do have a persistently existing community along with the evolution of new technology, the emergence of new problems and new challenges, and the proposal of new and even unmature solutions. It is in some sense much more difficult than maintenance efforts because machines and codes are under control while people are not.