Her starting as immature gives space for development.

I don't have to much of a problem with her myself, but like has been previously mentioned she is far to overused and I'm getting a bit tired of her by now. Also the dumb stuff with Ezra friggin time travelling to save her. like bruh FR?, time travel, if this was an option for Ezra why not just go back to when Sidious was brainwashing Anakin and warn the Jedi council or change something else that could have saved the galaxy? Say, exposing the chips in the clones or saving fives?

Time travel is never used in the most OP was possible because you could end up destroying everything or ending your own existence

^I don't think time travel has the same rules in every media/fandom. In the MCU, for example, they established that you wouldn't actually destroy the existing timeline by time traveling, just create an alternate one that co-exists with the former (if I got that right). Then we have "Back to the Future" where, from my understanding, time travel indeed changes the future, or rather, the (former) present of the time travellers.

I've more than once come across a joke about time travel according to which already the moving of a single object would suffice to change the whole timeline. So, technically, bringing back Ahsoka from the dead would be enough to create a whole new timeline (or directly change the past), too, since her reapparance between season 2 and 4 could have had an effect on a lot of things that would have happened otherwise differently during this time.

So, there doesn't seem to be any consistency regarding time travel rules which makes sense since it's a confusing idea, anyway. Also the main reason I'm personally not a big fan of this concept in general. Anyway, I don't think it's safe to predict what the outcome would have been if they had used time travel to prevent Order 66, if it made sense to use time travel for that or not

If time travel did work it could also be subject to determinism meaning what happens was always going to happen regardless. So going back in time may not change anything but just be part of the deterministic steps that bring it about.

There's a theory that Ezra saving Ahsoka created another timeline, and the timeline in which Ahsoka died is the one where the sequels take place.

^Time travel often serves as a convenient tool to undo certain events, especially when you follow the theory that it doesn't eliminate the existing reality but simply creates another one. I'm not surprised that some SW-fans adopt this theory as a headcanon. Doesn't make sense to me, personally, because I'm pretty sure the Sequels take place in the same universe as the one where the Ahsoka-show takes place. But people like to come up with all kinds of headcanons in order to ignore stuff they don't like.

But I'm personally not a big fan of time travel in movies and books, in general, anyway, 1) because it often simply doesn't make sense to me. 2) because it makes things just so easy. You don't like something? Just go back in time and create another timeline. It makes it easy to avoid consequences.

So, I'm personally not the biggest fan of Ahsoka being killed by Vader only to be brought back to life through time travel, either, but I'm also not immensely bothered by it and, to be fair, her being brought back seemed to have been planned from the start, it doesn't seem like a last minute-idea.

^^That sounds interesting but I find it hard to believe that going back in time wouldn't have an effect of some kind. So, not sure how the argument of determinism would work here

^ The idea is that time travel is already accounted for as part of the process. The act of travelling through time and the effects of that are what was always going to happen. Everything is mapped out already and it includes any attempts to change it.

^Thanks for explaining. Though that's exactly the main reason I don't like time travel-stories, lol: I'm already getting a headache again trying to puzzle out the different loops that lead to another. At one point, the past must have been "untouched" without interference. The first time it happens it couldn't have been interfered by a time traveller. Therefore, the argument that the way it played out in the end was always meant to happen doesn't make any sense to me (however, I suppose we should slowly get to an end with this conversation because it seems rather off-topic)

It's often known as a causality loop. Watch the original Terry Gilliam Twelve Monkeys film. That will (not) help your understanding. Lol.