I would not get worked up about it if it came from individual OSS projects, out of their own free will, one by one.
However, in several OSS projects I follow, it was always corporate steered "open" source devs who "proposed" the change and rammed it through, often against the majority opinion. To further their careers and stroke their egos.
Now GitHub, who still does business with sketchy companies (as does MSFT) does this entirely meaningless virtue signalling change.
Just to show OSS devs who is the boss and that they can do whatever they like with their money.
However, in several OSS projects I follow, it was always corporate steered "open" source devs who "proposed" the change and rammed it through, often against the majority opinion. To further their careers and stroke their egos.
Now GitHub, who still does business with sketchy companies (as does MSFT) does this entirely meaningless virtue signalling change.
Just to show OSS devs who is the boss and that they can do whatever they like with their money.