You touched on the exact pain point that might have started this entire discussion 
That’s precisely the kind of problem I’m facing right now — compilation is painful, and deployment is even more so.
One day I see something new called juliac. Naturally, I get curious and start digging in — I watch videos, read forum threads and pull requests, even experiment with it myself using its unstable API. But after all that, I still can’t find a clear explanation, direction, or instructions on how to actually use it (despite it being prominently mentioned in the Julia changelog). So, I finally have to ask: what’s the plan?
Apparently, juliac isn’t meant to replace PackageCompiler and isn’t an improvement at this stage — that’s fine and clear. But then I read this discussion, and see that PackageCompiler itself isn’t a core component and might or might not be maintained consistently.
So again, there seems to be a lack of cohesive vision — and that raises so many questions:
• How should Julia projects be compiled today — with PackageCompiler or juliac?
• Will one eventually replace the other?
• Should developers start migrating, or stay put?
• What’s the long-term plan? Why does Julia need two separate tools for binary compilation?
I tried searching through issues and discussions to find these answers, but they’re scattered or missing altogether. It feels like all of this could be clarified through a centralized proposal for juliac — one that lays out the motivation, roadmap, and relationship with existing tools.