I'm not much into web development professionally, but it's something I learn and use a bit as both a hobby and for personal projects. I looked at Elm a while back (maybe two years ago, but I'm not sure exactly). I decided against it after I ran into some issues related to language instability and old documentation. I dug a little further and it appeared to be how the Elm project was run, so I stayed away.
On your second point
> I haven't used the language, but I believe open source projects must be maintained by their maintainers as they see fit.
I totally agree. But I also think it's good when others point out the weaknesses in the project publicly, to prevent people from wasting time or having to deal with certain personalities. As long as it's true and done in a professional manner, an important part of open source is harsh public criticism.
For a hobbyist like me, Elm bounced around far too quickly that every time I returned to my side project it was incompatible. Worse, a library I would be using wouldn’t have made the upgrade so... that seemed OK in the first year or so but after a while you need some stability. The author is 100% right about how Elm’s package manager and repository are the only ones available and they can be really lacking sometimes.
On your second point
> I haven't used the language, but I believe open source projects must be maintained by their maintainers as they see fit.
I totally agree. But I also think it's good when others point out the weaknesses in the project publicly, to prevent people from wasting time or having to deal with certain personalities. As long as it's true and done in a professional manner, an important part of open source is harsh public criticism.