TLDR Expecting a community to change for you is unrealistic.
TLDR Expecting a community to change for you is unrealistic.
I think the writer is saying there should be some change, for everyone’s benefit, but specifically for new users.
I don’t know if they are right or wrong about that but that’s different than “ Expecting a community to change for you”.
About the only obligation they have back to the larger Linux community is GPL license and making the source code available.
It would be nice if Arch could be made easy to use, and the community could be less hostile to new users, without falling into obscurity, but it's an impossible catch-22.
In my mind, Arch's reputation is not that of a challenge, but more of an ongoing projects that you can soak up as over much time you'd like to dump into it. Basically the OS equivalent of a daily-drivable project car.
Though to be fair, I think one of the pillars of that reputation is the quality of the wiki. And I've been increasingly finding the wiki not living up to my expectations over the last however many years. But (somewhat concerningly) the Arch wiki seems to be as strong as ever relative to other sources, so I'm not sure how that balances out.
Maybe it doesn't, and I'm just behind the times.
This is a very troubling observation. I think that the open-source world would lose a truly great source of information should the Arch Wiki go away, and there is an clear problem with quality all across the Linux desktop space at the moment.
I don’t know / not worried about that.
I’m just saying the person’s point wasn’t that there should be change just for themselves.