Michael

It should all be right here https://discord.com/developers/docs/change-log

I think for now this move is no longer desired. That said, a rewrite of a lot of the inner workings are due imo and this change could be part...

Probably just needs to be something we leave to the user to handle, you're right about feasibility. A note in the docs would be enough.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding the goal of this, but Nostrum currently uses a `ConsumerSupervisor` for its event consumer, so every event received is already handled in a new process?

Yes it does, you'll have to handle them in a somewhat lower level format by following the Discord API docs at https://discord.com/developers/docs/interactions/message-components But Nostrum has full support for them.

I looked into this, and I'm not so sure it's a bug per se within serenity itself, more an issue/limitation of the discord api. If you look at the response...

Unless I'm missing something, at the very least we might have to/should keep the `#[hook]` or `#[command]` procedural macro even for a simple framework. Since you can't easily store references...

I stand corrected, could be done this way, where each passed `Fn` is wrapped in a closure: ```rust pub fn insert(&mut self, name: String, fut: &'static impl Fn(&Context, &Message, Args)...

Update: We've tried 3.2.0 and our problem persists

Due to the lack of response to this issue or the support ticket we filed a few days after opening this issue, we were forced to move to an alternate...