FOSS and open source licenses never ever granted entitlement for contributors to have their proposals reviewed/merged by maintainers. Neither it ever offered entitlement for users to ask for free support.
FOSS is about giving people access to source code so they can do with it whatever they want, and maintainers/authors should have always had the ability to "publish and forget" the source code, without having to deal with those "entitlements".
You're confusing things. The "social component" refers to people interacting with each other. Such as two developers working on a bug or a feature. Or a tester reporting a bug.
This is a big part of actual professional software development work.
I write a library. I put it up online, for other people to use, if they like. At what point did I assume any responsibility to play nice with others? Or work with others at all?
There's FOSS licenses, and then there's the social expectations around collaborative online development, and the latter is nowhere implied in the former.
FOSS was not historically weighed down with all these social expectations. Forking was not seen as some community failure, but the basic purpose of FOSS. Sites like GitHub were a major part of this shift.
Or maybe they mean there aren't good collaboration platforms in general, not sure.
I really really am not trying to start a political argument, but just as food for thought: this is exactly why I have faith in socialism (read: 'prosocial institutions and norms'). And whether socialism is eu- or dys-topian, it certainly cannot happen in the first place without a "social component"!
