However, I think the Orthodox Saints are already venerated more locally anyway. They don’t really have a concept of canonization by the unversal authority.
Their Saints are canonized and glorified by the local bishops, and venerated more locally.
When a Saint is venerated by people outside their native church, it is always at least semi-private, though some Saints (especially early ones) are popular or important enough to be practically universal, on practically all the individual calendars…but being accidentally venerated in each place locally, is technically different than being essentially venerated universally.
So I just dont think it should be that offensive or a change for the Orthodox Saints after 1453 to be venerated technically just locally on each Eastern calendar (according to the decision of that church), perhaps universal as a practical matter, but in a way not quite recognized as equivalent to universal papal canonization…but this shouldn’t be a problem or offensive, because the Orthodox* already* didn’t have the concept of universal papal canonization, so it shouldnt be an issue.
The public cults of a few Saints on both sides (like Photius) who were particularly associated with disunity…could be supressed and left to private veneration. But no one’s calendar would have to be touched or favorite saint given up. Though a universal date of Easter would be nice, perhaps using a third method (but NOT a fixed date, an idea I dont like and which isn’t traditional) based on the real moon in Jerusalem not the Roman charts, but potentially according to the biblical timing of it after the first new moon after the spring equinox (but not the Roman tabular equinox, but the true equinox as measured at Jerusalem).