[anze3db]

What they are doing is already discouraging people from contributing to the projects their tools are replacing[0]. If they go out of business and stop supporting their tools, it might leave the Python community in a bad place.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzW4-KEB664

[bdzr]

That video is.. weird. It claims that astral isn't contributing back despite the entirety of their code being permissively licensed. It's also sort of baffling that making tooling more accessible doesn't seem to be considered contributing back.

I'm not sure what the maker of that video wants, does he want money to be poured back into the community, or for no one else to make money?

[woodruffw]

I'm not sure this is a reasonable framing: LLVM stole much of GCC's thunder by being significantly easier to contribute to (and extend externally), but I don't think it would be accurate to say that LLVM is "discouraging" people from contributing to GCC.

[anze3db]

I'm not sure if you can compare a project that came out of a university and got adopted by Apple with a project developed by a VC backed company with no revenue. I'm sure Charlie has the best intentions with both ruff and uv, but we have no idea how this is going to play out.

[marwis]

LLVM was at least written in the same language it is compiling.

In this case they are replacing Python code with Rust which might exclude large part of Python community from being able to contribute.

[ForHackernews]

The slow death of GCC has been unquestionably bad for copyleft software.

[eviks]

Wouldn't their failure re-encourage people to contribute?