None of this is true. > And even in Rust earlier module system written by someone else and was dumped wholesale without enough justification to author who fina

None of this is true. > And even in Rust earlier module system written by someone else and was dumped wholesale without enough justification to author who finally left frustrated. I don't know what module system you're talking about. The first Cargo was unmaintained for a long time before being removed; the original author was long gone. The second rustpkg was largely Graydon's work, not "someone else". > Same with green threads which at one point they were hell bent on adding and then one fine day decided to dump. Also leading to ban someone in Rust community who was against green thread. We dumped them in no small part because the community didn't want them! And nobody was banned. > I think what people do not want to talk about or do not get is unlike Oracle, Google, MS or Apple Mozilla can't just add few dozen highly paid people for language development. So this big community led approach is more of practical matter than some enlightened way to develop software. In other words, you're saying we treat the community as just free labor. That's an incredibly cynical accusation, and one that bears no resemblance to reality. I'm pretty confident in predicting that if Rust had adopted a BDFL style of governance, it would have been dead long ago. Community input was critical in decisions like removal of green threads and I/O reform that have helped Rust find its niche.