This, a million times over. Every single “complaint” about Michael being Spock’s adoptive sister somehow “contradicting” past canon/continuity told on themselves, because Spock not volunteering personal information about his family is in fact entirely in character, supported repeatedly with his previous actions onscreen in every instance of meeting one of his family members.
I love the addition of Michael and Spock’s relationship to Spock’s history and character, and the first time I watched TOS’s Operation: Annihilate after the end of Discovery’s second season, I couldn’t help but think when Spock empathized with Kirk who was reacting to finding his own brother dead, saying “Captain, I understand how you must--” before Kirk cut him off, that Spock was recalling the loss of his own sister when she travelled into the future at the end of Such Sweet Sorrow, Part 2.
I know it didn’t have the same impact for eveyone else, but Michael’s familial connection to Spock was never an error or contradiction that required explanation.
Speaking for myself, I'm kind of the opposite. I like the idea of Michael being a human who spent part of her life on Vulcan, but I personally think making her a member of Spock's family who's conveniently avoided mention (until now

I totally agree that Spock is a rather private individual, but for me that's irrelevant as far as Michael never getting a reference. She was raised by one of Vulcan's best known citizens (Sarek) and later served in Starfleet, as Spock chose to do. Not only did she succeed in becoming an officer, but she's the officer who helped start the war with the Klingons after apparently rebelling against her captain. If anything, I think she'd be rather infamous instead of the opposite, never minding the idea of Starfleet trying to conveniently classify everything related to Discovery.

I have the same issue with elements of Star Trek: Enterprise, because that series had no small amount of executive meddling. They wanted the show to have iconic elements of past Treks and weren't overly interested in the quality of storytelling or continuity, because in their minds that was secondary at best. Hence we wound up with a new USS Enterprise that somehow gets left off the main list and a crew who accomplished feats that would seem almost legendary in later series - like helping the Federation get started. But somehow any references to them are fairly sparse, it seems.

That's not to say ENT is bad, by any means - I genuinely enjoy parts of it and some of the prequel elements (like the Andorians) are handled really well.
