Lack of open source shown as negative part of D on Dr. Dobbs

[Joseph Rushton Wakeling]

On 10/05/12 00:27, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> The only thing that isn't fully open source is the dmd backend, and dmd gets
> more pull requests than druntime and Phobos combined (it's also the project
> with the biggest bottleneck, because _everything_ goes through Walter rather
> than a small group of developers). So, I don't think that the license is
> negatively impacting us at all as far as contributions go. It was having the
> source in svn rather than in git up on github which was the real problem.
> We've gotten _way_ more contributions (especially to dmd) ever since we put it
> all up on github.

Sure.  I've said a number of times that I don't think the backend licence is a 
short-term problem, and that's because I don't see the 
multiple-avenues-of-contribution aspect as a short-term issue either.  The user 
and contributor base is currently too small for it to be a factor.

I do think, though, that it may be something that starts to bite as the 
community scales up in size.