But the author expresses way too much confidence in the description of the project. It has no test, no type hints, no pluggable error handling, not fall back when the redis instance dies, and has been used in prod by apparently a single entity.
Stating "WakaQ is stable and ready to use in production" is irresponsible, as a task queue is critical infrastructure and this could lure devs into thinking this code is way more mature than it is.
Of course, one should do due diligences when evaluation a new part of the stack. I also appreciate the enthousiasm of the article, and I'm sure the code already procudes many benefits for the author.
But no, a asynchronous execution system dealing with priority, resiliance and network messages, that have existed for a month, is in no way stable and ready. It's nascent and promising.
I've changed it to "WakaQ is still a new project, so use at your own risk."