You are drawing conclusions based on arbitrary facts. GCJ has always been going against the grain both politically and technologically, no wonder it ended up wh

You are drawing conclusions based on arbitrary facts. GCJ has always been going against the grain both politically and technologically, no wonder it ended up where it did. There are strong efforts and weak efforts. The fact that many projects fail doesn't mean that it's a bad idea for this specific project to be maintained by a community. And no, "community" doesn't necessarily mean unaffiliated developers, they can be affiliated, like I have already stated many times, and still collectively considered a community. Open source can be a collaborative effort by major players or it can be a hopeless attempt to catch up with such. For the last 15 years or even more, it has been a common practice to commoditize technologies that are widely used across the industry. Java fully fits the above description, so maintaining it by a strong community effort would be a natural fit. Actually, from what I know, it almost works like that right now, we just need to take the licensing power from Oracle's greedy hands and keep the process the same as it is.