On the state of Eclipse

I applaud Bjorn for bravely and candidly expressing his thoughts on the state of Eclipse.Here are a couple of points that came to my mind, following the discussion. I've included my thoughts on them below.How do you encourage diversity through individual participation?The lack of diversity in many projects is something I find troubling. A diverse committer base is an insurance policy against an entity pulling the plug on a project. It has happened in the past. If you consume a non-diverse project commercially, it may be in your interest to get involved more actively.Diversity also encourages openness. Openness encourages contributions. Contributions encourage diversity.The downside is that increased diversity comes with increased communication and coordination overhead. I believe this is why the model of one project = one company is quite popular at Eclipse.org. As a community we have to ask ourselves, is this the standard we want to set and have come to expect? How is this different of just putting the code up on sourceforge? Wouldn't it be better to have a stricter requirement for diversity? For example, you can't exit incubation if you don't have at least two (or more) contributing entities on your project.Ideas:(a) making it easier for individuals to contribute - DVCS, more flexible IP policy, help wanted lists of items; 'how to contribute' info on project homepage(b) maintaining a high degree of responsiveness - for example NEW bugzillas without timely response or bugzillas with attached patches with no response are insulting to contributors and should not be tolerated(c) encouraging diversity - make diversity a requirement for exiting incubation; existing projects are reviewed and encouraged to take action to increase diversityTo be continued...PS: Obviously this is my personal opinion and does not represent in any way the position of my employer.