Absolutely not! We depend on it internally (engine.apollographql.com is a Meteor app), and Galaxy hosting revenue is THE reason we didn't have to raise money until we felt like it, which is why we got to pick our investors in this round.
Behind the scenes, as the lead developer for both Apollo Client and Meteor, I am constantly borrowing technologies from one to benefit the other. Meteor may move more slowly these days, but that's because it's relatively mature. Apollo has to move more quickly because we're still making (and remaking) fundamental decisions.
Even as community enthusiasm for Meteor has slowed, Galaxy revenue has not, and it's honestly not the worst thing for an open-source project if people who came for the hype either (a) find real reasons to stay, or (b) take their hype-thirst elsewhere.
I have some ideas for increasing Meteor contributor engagement that I'll be giving a talk about at the next Meteor Night (tentatively July 9th in SF).
I love meteor, and don't really want to move our stack off it but it's becoming a more real thing that we have to face in the near future as it's hard to see how it can grow with us!
I can only imagine the reason galaxy revenue is increasing is that the companies started off Meteor 2-3 years ago are now becoming real. I know a few companies in our YC batch that use Meteor.