I know I'm going to be the odd duck on this one because everyone is into the highest technology possible, but in my opinion, note I did say in my opinion, that the highest technology possible for bikes, just as for cars has not worked out real well which is why cars reliability records have dropped to just average compared with just 20 years ago, but I digress.
Again, in my opinion, I would avoid the electronic shifting stuff, sure it's faster especially with the front derailleur, but only a tad faster on the rear, chains do seem to last a bit longer as well, but the biggest issue is overall reliability. The batteries only will last 2 to 3 years then you have to buy a new one, there have been software glitches which of course requires a flash to fix it, then of course there is always the possibility of the battery going dead on a ride or a servo motor quitting, or the unit shutting down in the rain; you can fix a mechanical system yourself rather easily; . If you are not convinced of the issues see this and read the replies:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrkH2bIKrK0
The rain issue is reported here:
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=13821 You can also read about issues here:
https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/...mechanical-groupsets-better-electronic-225805 I don't understand why people want to be tied to a battery charger all the time, it's the same thing with electric cars, I don't want to be tied to a charger, it's plain crazy to me.
Now on to disk brakes, unless you like riding in the rain a lot there is no advantage to disk brakes. The ability of a bike to stop itself is all tied to the tires adhesion to the road, and a rim brake is essentially a very large disk brake anyways. A friend of mine has a bike with disk brakes, and last spring he and I had a set of 4 various speed (15 mph, 20 mph and 30 mph) stops repeated each 3 times, of course we had different tires, he had a set of Conti Grand Prix 4 Seasons I was on a set of Hutchinson Intensives, we both had aluminum rims, and weight wise he weighs about 5 pounds more then me but his bike weighs 2 pounds less than mine so I added 2 full water bottles and a full seat bag to get the weight a bit closer; each time we performed a test we both stopped within a foot of each during the first two sets, sometimes he stopped sooner and sometimes I did which we attributed to reaction time, the odd thing was that at 30 mph speed, which was done last, I stopped consistently a bit faster, not sure if that's because the disk rotors were getting hot because trying to do a touch test burned our fingers on the rotor but not on the rim. So I'm leaning towards heat fade, and since the rim is a much larger area it remains cooler and cools off faster. We did not test in rainy conditions, but I feel confident that since the rotor is smaller the pads would wipe the water off the rotor quicker than the pads on the rim would and thus the disk brakes should stop a wee bit better. Also disk brakes do cost more to maintain but it also saves on the cost of the rim wearing out, when I figured up the cost over 30,000 miles it turned out to be a wash unless you have some really expensive rims; obviously with carbon fiber rims the only way to stop fast is with disk brakes unless those CF wheels have an aluminum brake track but then you're looking at the possibility of CF delaminating from the AL brake track due to the heat from braking cannot dissipate through the CF wheel fast like it can with an all AL rim. Weight wise and aerodynamics wise between the two I think is mostly hooey but that's me. So this brake choice thing is something only you can answer depending on the environment you'll be riding in.
If it were me, and thus my opinion again coming into play, knowing I like things simple and easy to repair I would go with the Addict Foil 20 mechanical derailleurs and no disks.