I believe it's a fairly poorly managed project, by looking at objective measures: * Key documents are inaccessible to majority of potential contributors becaus

I believe it's a fairly poorly managed project, by looking at objective measures: * Key documents are inaccessible to majority of potential contributors because they're only in Japanese. * Releases are not semantic versioned. E.g., the second level version number is simply an indicator that another Christmas has passed. It's not an indicator of any semantics. * Press releases are untruthful and self-deceptive: "Ruby is now semantically versioned". On discussion with the core devs on this issue, they declare that semver actually isn't important. So, which is it? * A closed, insular development process with no public roadmap, and terse release notes. Cf. Python. I could go on. But these items alone are good evidence that the project is not "insanely well managed."