> but the language is still very young and we believe a tight-knit group of engineers with a common vision moves faster than a community-driven effort. This is

> but the language is still very young and we believe a tight-knit group of engineers with a common vision moves faster than a community-driven effort. This is a false dichotomy. For years Golang was developed in the open but strictly moved on the vision of its creators rather than being "community-driven". Many other venerable open source projects don't involve the community in serious strategy discussions. The community mainly acts as a bug finder/fixer. Mojo could do the same: be open source but choose its own priorities internally. I'm guessing that Mojo is still looking for a monetization strategy. Keeping important things proprietary in Mojo at this stage helps I'm sure (nothing wrong with that). But I feel the era of proprietary programming language play is over. Unless you create some hardware (which the Mojo guys don't) it's going to be tough.