I’m not a fan of the section on governance. I can certainly understand why you’d prefer to use community-driven software, but this post steers close to callin

I’m not a fan of the section on governance. I can certainly understand why you’d prefer to use community-driven software, but this post steers close to calling for-profit free software “not actually FOSS.” FOSS is FOSS, regardless of whether the developer is solo or a megacorp, whether they accept patches or not, whether there is a proprietary build of the same product available or not. You can disapprove of some of the things these developers do, but don’t water down the definition of FOSS by adding extra stipulations.