Those issues are not technical, buy social. And they all share a common denominator - project culture, and less broadly - the still-present cultural bits that founders have instilled, enforced and defended.
This is a good example. Though, the large disparity between what companies consider “done” and what openly governed communities consider “done” has been consistently and repeatedly brought up since the beginning of the thread. Not sure why we need to relitigate this.
RFC 140 is one of the best RFC we had: it was excellently written, and people very quickly unanimously agreed that it’s very good. The only point of disagreement was naming, and it was unanimously decided to be pretty insignificant.
And then Eelco came during FCP, and said he’s going to block people’s work on implementation because he doesn’t like the name. Despite not having been involved with Nixpkgs for years. If I had two paragraphs to describe the issue we as a community are dealing with, I would write this and previous paragraph verbatim.
I recommend reading the full discussion around naming in RFC 140. It’s a perfect demonstration on how Eelco has been continuously blocking efforts in the community. Perhaps, if we haven’t lucked out with finding by-name which apparently pleased Eelco, RFC 140 wouldn’t have been done to this day.