Have you bothered to read my post ? I don't know how I can make it any clearer ?
1. NixOS were dependent on DONATED service(s)
2. It is not sensible to assume the service will continue being donated forever, that is just foolhardy.
Anyone who has ever run a business or has been involved in charitable work knows this. NixOS appears to have just learnt the hard way instead.
Sure, but we're still talking after the event here.
The overall point of being over-reliant on a single donor in the first place remains the fundamental problem that could have been avoided.
I suggest we draw a line in the sand and agree to disagree.
Meanwhile I think it's a bit silly that they didn't have a plan B for 425 TiB (!) of data and are scrambling to figure it out now. It's not about "fixing problems that don't exist", it's called "planning ahead for a scenario that is practically guaranteed to happen" and has high risk for the future of the project if they don't have such a plan.
They created essentially a SPOF where "failure" was losing the financial goodwill with some company.
Rubbish.
Its nothing to do with "start-up" or "open-source project".
As I clearly said. Its Dummies 101 ... if "somebody" is giving me money, then only an idiot doesn't consider what happens if that "somebody" stops giving me money.