Questions about the desktop environments cited in the knowledge base

I am looking for an operating system that meets a number of requirements. At first I thought about setting up my own Arch, but memories of Vietnam came back to me while I was installing it, so I decided to reject that idea as a first choice. Then I tried both Fedora and openSUSE, and they were fine, but they still didn’t meet my requirements, plus in many cases it’s a hassle to install certain software. That’s why I went back to Arch, but this time looking for an already created distribution that met, even if they were, most of my requirements.
The requirements are as follows:

  • It must be a light distribution both in post-installation weight and in resources it consumes, as I intend to install it on a pendrive.
  • It must be able to install in it a Tor router, to try that all or almost all the network passes before by the onion network, or in its impossibility, that ProtonVPN can be installed in it.
  • Another requirement of installation, I must be able to install on it or Brave or Librewolf (if in the previous point I can not route the entire traffic through the tor network, at least I would like to half solve it with the Tor mode of Brave. I could install Tor Browser, but I don’t need such a high level of anonymity).
  • It should have a rolling or semi-Rolling update cycle.
  • Must have Wayland by default.
  • (Optional) Must have a minimalistic but nice and customizable desktop.

And that’s how I found Archcraft, a project that I know since its beginnings, and that I was glad to see how it had continued its development. This is where my question arises. Archcraft released some time ago a flavor of their paid distribution, called Archcraft Wayland Special Edition. I bought it, and it’s not bad. I’m afraid that I’m not going to maintain it or that the updates are going to break their wonderful desktop, so I’m thinking of using Archcraft base.
So, I have entered into a small dilemma, because in your knowledge base you don’t recommend environments like i3, environment that Archcraft base has. In general that distro is crazy for twm lovers, and I think that the use of this kind of environments can be a “good method” to avoid that physical persons use your computer (it increases the security), but of course, if you say that it is not recommended…

What do you think about this distribution, do you think it would be better to use Archcraft Wayland in this case, do you know any other operating system that meets my requirements?
Best regards.

EDIT: By the way, I didn’t say what I was targeting. Basically I want it to be a day to day PC, that revolves around the browser, something like Chrome OS.
(By the way, let’s see when the Graphene OS team is encouraged to make a Graphene for chromebooks jsjsjs would be cool right?)

First of all I never used Archcraft so I cant really speak about it/compare it to other distros, but if it’s just a preconfigured Arch then maintaining it should be the same as on “normal” Arch.
I think i3 is mostly not recommended because it uses X instead of wayland, but I don’t see why you shouldn’t use something like sway which is the wayland alternative of i3.

I don’t really understand which requirement Fedora does not fulfill.
If it’s not light enough you might want to try out a Fedora Minimal install from their Netinstall .iso (Fedora > Alt Downloads > Netinstall (if you intend to use wifi make sure to at least select Minimal Install + Networking package group in the installer)) and install sway and everything you need on top of it. It is a very ressource friendly twm setup wich is minimal but highly customizable due to sway.
With dnf + rpmfusion + flatpak for me there never was any difficulty to find the packages i need without ever touching Copr so maybe you could specify what the hassle with packages was for you.