How license will evolve is unclear. I personally don't mind it starting closed to figure out a contribution model or whatever they want to sort out as long as they have clear commitment. However, the current statement for open source is so vague that I don't want to invest time on it.

I think not investing time in Mojo is the currently the correct decision. If Modular decides they have a good product and would like broad community adoption, they will make the open source and licensing decisions that would support that. They're smart and I presume aware of that dynamic, so honestly I suspect they don't want a broad community just yet.

Community management and language feature haggling is not worth the expense at an early for-profit company with an alpha language that needs to solve internal problems.

Isn’t the whole point that you don’t invest time in it but just switch over your python project and then optimize it in a ship of theseus manner?

Good. It's an early alpha product. You shouldn't invest time into it. If their current licensing model prevents people from using it from anything serious, that sounds like a win.

It's a programming language. Just playing around to see what it is capable of means serious time investment. I wasn't planning on using it on production. Anyway, that was a feedback for the creators. I'll check back if they change the license.

Mojo team is avoiding this topic like a plague. I recently listened to whole Lex Fridman episode with Mojo's founder Chris Lattner [1] and I don't think they said a word about licensing. I still don't get it tbh.

I don't even understand how can Mojo be compared to Python without reflecting on Python Software Foundation which is arguably the main reason Python is such a wild success. We should do more PSF not less.

1 - https://lexfridman.com/chris-lattner-3