Lack of funding by choice of license
Created by: htstudios
Current: MIT Expected: AGPL3
ref: http://www.redox-os.org/book/book/introduction/why_redox.html
Compared to BSD, Linux is completely frontal-lobe-missing, in every imaginable way. The code base is one big, ugly hack, and the design is bad in so many ways. We don't want such a project!
• Logic dictates: If your analysis of Linux as a tech is correct there have to be other reasons that it strives and strives a lot more than BSD. One of those reasons is simply GPL2 vs BSD. BSDs fail cause of their licencse. OSS is aside a few believers financed though companies paying contributers paychecks. MIT/BSD fails here. • To continue this argument: Linux currently dies cause it is not AGPL3. Where Microsoft (BSD network stack), Apple and others did not give back on MIT projects, Google, Facebook, Amazon et al are not giving back their PaaS mods to Linux because it is not AGPL3.
I can't judge on Rust and I miss an analysis of L4, QNX etc but this project will, unless you understand the very practical implications of MIT/BSD (and GPL2) be missing the train on funding. And: even if you get funding now, it won't last forever where if the project excels at a tech level, with AGPL3, you would.
This is the key drawback BSDs have and selecting AGPL3 over GPL2 could be your key advantage over Linux.
Consider your choices and good luck.