Again, what is the difference between a microkernel and a monolithic kernel, and why does it influence the politics of development? And, again, why does a monolithic kernel imply “central control” in development, over a microkernel?
No, the difference is in what parts of the OS are in what privilege level and address space, and how they communicate with each other. It has nothing to do with the shape of teams building them. If someone is building a filesystem or a network protocol for the system, then the difference between that person implementing a server for a microkernel or a kernel module for a monolithic kernel is purely a low-level-detail technical one.
I think we're talking past each other. You want to discuss architecture and that's fine, super.
I'm merely offering a different explanation for why software, which is presently built by humans, might express different configurations based on that fact. It's not a qualitative statement as to the merits of one over the other.
