I don't think this is how open source development works. Probably most of the core contributors are doing it for pleasure, not for satisfying the needs of the users.
Then there is the implication that because they are doing it for pleasure, they don't owe anything to anyone. It's ridculous. This software affects millions of people and it's not a dumb hobby project.
... no more ridiculous than the idea that software which millions of people depend on should be a commercial product, or a government project, and beholden to the politics of CEOs and/or government bureaucrats.
https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/master/LICENSE
4. PSF is making Python available to Licensee on an "AS IS" basis. PSF MAKES NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED. BY WAY OF EXAMPLE, BUT NOT LIMITATION, PSF MAKES NO AND DISCLAIMS ANY REPRESENTATION OR WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR THAT THE USE OF PYTHON WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY THIRD PARTY RIGHTS.
5. PSF SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO LICENSEE OR ANY OTHER USERS OF PYTHON FOR ANY INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR LOSS AS A RESULT OF MODIFYING, DISTRIBUTING, OR OTHERWISE USING PYTHON, OR ANY DERIVATIVE THEREOF, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY THEREOF.
If there is not implied social responsibility that PSF keeps python running, then no one will be using it.
The millions of users are usually providing nothing in return for the software, I don't see how that entitles them to anything. In fact, I think it is the user's responsibility to make sure the software is appropriate for their use.
If the governance of an open source project is bad enough, the way to fix it is to get a group of people together to maintain a fork. (Companies that depend on open source software can and will maintain their own branches.)
And the ability to work on it is a gift, too. If you're not going to take working on something as high profile as Python seriously, if you're just going to treat it as a hobby, then do everyone a favor and don't bother.
"You don't have any right to demand this of them"
As a user of Python, I absolutely do.
What, precisely, do you mean by "professional", and how is the Python team not being "professional" right now? Because the definition of "professional" I use is "Doing something for money, as a profession", with no implications about the quality of the work, and that's obviously not what you mean by it... right?
How do you take that assertion and turn it into something actionable?
What, concretely, would they be doing differently if they fully signed on to the above?
I also am absolutely floored that you'd pull out the term gaslighting for the parent comment which makes no assertions and only asks you to elaborate on your point more.
I think you need to step back, re-read this comment chain, and go look at a mirror.
Thanks in advance.