For this case, I being emotional here, sure, I'm not a "finite state machine". But being emotional doesn't make arguments less/more valid. I had to sit down and re-think what I actually didn't like during this conversation. It's the attitude: you first thought are concentrated at finding the ways to break 'old thing' and then you stop investigating the ways how to mitigate the problem. Then I spend time to find the solution only for you ignore the solution by theorizing "what could happen if the players install/re-install weidu mods using not-quite supported way". As somebody who's getting similar "no, nope, nada"-kind of answers all the time, it makes me feel disappointed and angry sometimes. Especially when I can't do anything with it. I failed to point at this during my rant.
Regarding the "no breaking changes" - sure, but just as DavidW said, it isn't a breaking change when you take the whole weidu ecosystem into consideration. What you did here is cherry-pick the theoretical case when the mods can break after update, then you ignore all other similar cases (weidu updates, designated random replace/change, tp2 changes etc) and use 'no breaking changes' argument as if other cases did didn't existed since begging of the weidu itself. You edge case are the same story as 'designated replace/change or tp2 name changes'. All of them are in the 'medium but acceptable flaw' pool.
Finally, I wouldn't call this a dog fight. We are in the same boat. Rethink and put cons/pros at the wage. If you still not convinced, create a pool and ask community for feedback so you hands will 'stay clean'. I'm sure that you can count on the support from mod authors/maintainers.