There was a time when the dream of open source was healthy and strong. GitHub was a big part of the movement. So it shouldn't be surprising that they did more of their planning in the open than a company like Apple.

There are tradeoffs with secrecy. Trust me when I tell you, secrecy comes at a cost. It limits the flow of ideas, even within your own organization.

I'm tempted to agree with you anyways, since I've been in the situation before where we wanted to change things we were making while we were making them. You don't want to give off the impression that you don't know what you're doing.

Honestly, this kinda goes back to agile vs. waterfall too. It's all about defining requirements and meeting them.

> There are tradeoffs with secrecy. Trust me when I tell you, secrecy comes at a cost. It limits the flow of ideas, even within your own organization.

To clarify, I’m not advocating for active secrecy as goal, especially not inside the company. I’m more arguing for not actively sharing with the outside what you don’t have to because they don’t have the same context you do and will judge your decision out of their own biased feelings. Which then leads to you having to waste an inordinate amount of time explaining yourself.