The reality is most projects do have core developers that make most of the
decisions, that isn't weird. Purely community led projects generally fall
apart due to in-fighting pretty quickly. There are very few projects where
people not committing code can have a significant impact on the end product.
For example Debian uses a series of principles and a management structure
called Web of Trust that empowers some to make decisions over many, otherwise
nothing would ever get done.
My feeling is I can track the code, see the commits, and in that way the
direction of the project is being communicated. I don't need a fireside chat
from Ruben in the forum every quarter, I'd rather he focus on the software.
Should Ruben bring more people in if he can and they are willing? Sure, but
that is his decision to make. There are a lot of factors for him to consider
and its often made out to be much easier than it is.
