I feel the complete opposite about this -- it&#x27;s a really <i>good</i> example of management not just making a conceptual decision but diving into the details and making a call, but with respect for all involved. Note that:
* The chairperson joins in and speaks with authority. This isn&#x27;t a VP of eng making a call about two repos.
* It&#x27;s not a binary decision - &quot;cancel development, fire the people affected, leave the product to wither on the vine&quot; - but a nuanced one: don&#x27;t make decisions that make Firefox worse, I don&#x27;t pretend to have all the details but will give you an example of one decision that I have an opinion on and who you should look to for advice (the platform and infrastructure teams)
* Recognizes that it&#x27;s not just a technical call but has legal and community issues, and tells you who will be sorting those out as well.<p>Management is hard -- you can&#x27;t just make a blunt statement and expect people to fall in line, especially in open-source projects. Would you have preferred a harder line? Do you think that would&#x27;ve been better for the community in the long run?