HC (and all), here's a place for that adage: "That's not a bug, it's a feature!"
Getting updated by relink is precisely what many of us would *not* want "freelinks" to try to do. Freelinks are "soft" links, floating "above" tiddler text; though the connection can be recognized, the tiddler text itself sits solidly on the ground, unaffected by the presence of the link.
In my academic use case, I have a reason to prefer it that way. There's plenty of tiddler text *not* authored by me. It should stay just as it is -- relatively "hard" text. The beauty of freelinks is how various implicit connections (to concepts I'm discussing) *jump out* of that existing text. But if I change the title of one of my concept-discussion tiddlers, I most certainly would not want my source texts to get overwritten!
Granted, I might be happy for the *option* to scan and select some places where my title-edit should reverberate through some other tiddlers. But if variants of freelinks and relink were ever to "shake hands" in this way, this must be a clearly marked and optional development, or it will break much of what makes freelinks great, for users like myself.
-Springer