[marco_craveiro]

I think your comment is interesting, and I do think the FSF at times held back Emacs development when it thought to be against their political aims. Having said that:

a) I think its good that in this day and age where everything is market driven (for better or for worse), someone is willing to take a position purely on ethical grounds. If nothing else because we need a plurality of approaches in order to find the "right" one. Also, note that RMS is no longer involved in Emacs development, AFAIK, and hasn't been for a while. He may pop in the mailing lists frequently, but his "word" does not have to be implemented.

b) the very large Emacs community does not share the political vision in its entirety and thus is not constrained by it. As a long term Emacs user, I have never seen Emacs developing at the fast and furious pace it has today. And this is both in terms of the external code (MELPA et al.) as well as the core itself, for which we must thank the current maintainer.

In fact, I'd even go further: almost all of the historical problems I've had with Emacs have been addressed with the current work already released or in branches - e.g., LSP, DAP, native compilation, tree-sitter... I do not think Emacs' progress has been held by the political views; and even my concerns with copyright assignment as a factor that slows down development have been comprehensively proven wrong by the speed at which Emacs is developing. I noted a great step-change in Emacs velocity over the last 5 years, and if anything it seems to be accelerating.