[aithrowaway1987]

But that is not the standard for current GNU projects in large part because of all the easily avoidable friction. "If it was good enough for Richard Stallman in 1987, it's good enough for Microsoft in 2024" is just a dumb argument.

Not to mention you're conflating apples with oranges, since a software standard is very different from an application. POSIX wasn't just one Bell Labs employee working by himself.

From the article:

> The LSP should be an open standard, like HTTP, with an open committee that represents the large community which is invested in LSP, and can offer their insight in how to evolve it.

There is no goalpost moving here.

[cryptonector]

Building and maintaining a community is hard work. Even just talking to all comers is hard work. You need a team for that, but if you're a team of one then the community is likely going to suffer. You could find external contributors to promote to committers, but that's work too, and maybe LSP's maintainer doesn't want that (or maybe LSP's maintainer's employer (MSFT) doesn't want that). Apart from what MSFT wants, the rest is just as likely to happen for small enough projects whether they be GNU projects or not.