[saagarjha]

Your point is valid, but isn’t what I was getting at, because it’s largely equivalent to a maintainer just dividing yo wind down contributions to some software they made. This is something we generally consider to ok, although some exceptions exist.*

Here, the project is actually taking part of the community with it, fracturing contributions and the people who work on it. Going back to the car example, it’s like you have a couple of people carpooling and you each take turns buying snacks to share so you’re not hungry during the trip. Now the two people will go in the new car, or their own vehicles, and now you have to buy snacks entirely by yourself, there’s no pooling anymore. This is stretching the analogy a little bit, because you can copy software and not snacks, but a lot of people contribute to open source because, well, if everyone contributes a bit they all benefit from the community pool of code in the future. If I submitted code to this project while it was open source and now to my access to the shared benefits of an open source project is gone, because I have to use the old code pre-relicense, then I’d be kind of upset.

*Name squatting, actively attempting to advertise an unmaintained project, other forms of essentially false advertising nonwithstanding