> At least as far as commits go, his main contributions since then appear to consist of merging some small doc fixes, and monetizing the project by adding donation links, ads, intrusive sponsored links, etc. All of this money goes directly into his pocket, not the project's maintainers.

> I also learned that he has a history of selling premium support contracts for Requests, where he took the money and then delegated the actual work to unpaid volunteers.

> I don't have any objection to trying to make money from open-source. I've written before about how open-source doesn't get nearly enough investment. I do object to exploiting volunteers, driving out community members, and lying to funders and the broader community. Reitz has a consistent history of doing all these things.

They're quite serious and the blog post seems quite convincing.

- PEP 533 – Deterministic cleanup for iterators

- PEP 518 – Specifying Minimum Build System Requirements for Python Projects

- PEP 517 – A build-system independent format for source trees

- PEP 465 – A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

- PEP 600 – Future ‘manylinux’ Platform Tags for Portable Linux Built Distributions

- PEP 8016 – The Steering Council Model

- PEP 568 – Generator-sensitivity for Context Variables

(and that's as far as I cared to look - unfortunately https://peps.python.org/ lists the authors by last name and there are multiple people named "Smith")

So it seems he has in fact "done much".

He made the Trio library, which is ridiculously good and also ridiculously hard to implement (just look at this issue [1] for example where he carefully examines the three (!) different async APIs on Windows). Lessons from it are being folded back into the asyncio library in core Python (e.g. exception groups) so everyone benefits even if they don't use Trio directly.

[1] https://github.com/python-trio/trio/issues/52