Sorry to interrupt, but what you're honestly describing is how there's really a tricky way for a company that uses open source to make money from open source. Their contributions are going to be scrutinized and yet somehow, they have to still make money.

Face it, open source based companies can/will/have made money, but it's usually at the sacrifice of something. What you call a lack of transparency, the business-minded part of me just sees a company that is running into that difficult task of being open, contribute to open source and still make money.

Sailfish has been ported to other devices. Maemo never was officially done as such. BME was never opened, it was reversed engineered. You're simply looking at "open" as how it affects you; not community per se. Open discussion does not make a company open; it makes it transparent.

Repositories make a company open. Look around, many companies do such. But the proprietary bits will always be behind closed doors. Just like executive decisions.

Things like such are better behind closed doors. Just like design by committee is very bad; so is letting a committee of disjoined folks that can't even agree on which shell is best.

Actually I think it'll be better if you described a more transparent company, what makes them transparent, and what Jolla could do more than they already do. Community is nebulous, very vague. Their FOSS endeavors are noted; libhybris is being used by other companies. Even Ubuntu uses it.

Glad to see you say that. But do you mean it? A business has the capability to run parts of itself behind closed doors. You've yet to discuss a fully open and profitable open company. Name two.

RedHat is rather hushed about a lot of the things they do. Want support? Pay for it. So what would make Jolla an open company to you? Give you everything, open to discussion, help them run their business... and if it fails, would you share in that too?

I, unfortunately, do believe so. Meritocracy works best when money isn't involved; but when community comes together to solve a problem for all.

And without a direction or option given thus far - mind you, I'm not picking on you, but you seem to be the most level-headed and most capable of expression yourself in a lot of forms here in these regards, but this is an open discussion, no pun intended - I think this will become a masturbatory exercise of opinion and no resolution.

I'll ignore the prior emotive based conversations. That part doesn't seem to want to be resolved. But how folks think Jolla should be run, I'm curious.

I've seen only opinion that affects the individual thus far. And that's wasted on a community based company endeavor like Jolla.