Nobody is owed a sustainable ecosystem to profit off of open source. When things align to be mutually beneficial, that’s great. But by the nature of it, if you want to make money off of software, you should not release it as open source. It’s probably going to eventually wind up being a conflict of interest, wherein the “open” parts of a project eventually become less and less relevant in favor of closed parts.
Open source doesn’t and shouldn’t guarantee a sustainable business model. The best you can hope for is that parties collaborate because they can benefit mutually from this collaboration, like with the Linux kernel.
Your problem transcends one whiner on Twitter; private entities can monopolize public agency across contexts and not be held accountable at all.
Here you are in a VC echo chamber; good luck
The homebrew maintainer couldn’t even get hired at Google [2] if I recall, even though they’re big fans of using the tooling internally!
[1] https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/04/tech-... (OpenSSL Software Foundation President Steve Marquess wrote in a blog post last week that OpenSSL typically receives about $2,000 in donations a year and has just one employee who works full time on the open source code.)
[2] https://twitter.com/mxcl/status/608682016205344768 (Google: 90% of our engineers use the software you wrote (Homebrew), but you can’t invert a binary tree on a whiteboard so fuck off.)