Really excited about Mojo, but not very excited about being fully closed source. I understand not going OSS right now if there's still a lot of churn expected,

Really excited about Mojo, but not very excited about being fully closed source. I understand not going OSS right now if there's still a lot of churn expected, but I think that can be worked around: 1. Just because something is OSS doesn't mean the public is entitled to defining the roadmap or design decisions. If you set working norms up front and make it clear who has decision-making power and why, people will decide for themselves if they want to engage or not. A lot of frustration in OSS comes from lack of clear boundaries around how and why something evolves the way it does. 2. You can meet in the middle and be source-open. Don't use an OSI license, don't guarantee that you'll look at a community contribution, and don't guarantee that you'll engage on a particular issue. People can still benefit from seeing the source and deciding on if it's the right tool for them. I know a lot of folks rag on "corporate controlled OSS", but there's a lot of examples of that motion working really well for products. I hope Mojo does this eventually.