Yes. Be locked in. It's better to go 100% and only pay the switch costs if you have to.
Developing abstractions to let you switch technologies has 2 costs: The actual development, and not fully utilizing a specific technology. Lots of people prefer pain in small doses because it can be rationalized as eventual payoff.
There are degrees of this decision, of course, but I would say most folks worry too much about this particular champagne problem.
> Yes. Be locked in.
That'd be fine if the decision just affected the decision-maker's system. But the secondary effects are that it binds the external users of that system to the vendor's ToS.