Absolutely not, but it's also not a binary choice between "power-mad maintainer" and "corporate management".
There's plenty of maintainers who aren't that sort of a stick in the mud (even on the Linux kernel), the problem is that the Linux kernel has a few too many entrenched ones who are basically using their position to be a bully to interested contributors. They're generally aware enough that they know that the people they get into fights with aren't likely to use any of the official processes and are more willing to put up with it.
It's more akin to "this maintainer should be replaced" rather than "the entire management is bad"; to my understanding the actually important trees (as in, the server related components, since Linux is primarily used as a server kernel) don't have these maintainers; they're mostly on the stuff that matters less like well... Sleep/Wake related things, speakers and batteries, all of which are mostly useful for desktops and laptops.
There's plenty of maintainers who aren't that sort of a stick in the mud (even on the Linux kernel), the problem is that the Linux kernel has a few too many entrenched ones who are basically using their position to be a bully to interested contributors. They're generally aware enough that they know that the people they get into fights with aren't likely to use any of the official processes and are more willing to put up with it.
It's more akin to "this maintainer should be replaced" rather than "the entire management is bad"; to my understanding the actually important trees (as in, the server related components, since Linux is primarily used as a server kernel) don't have these maintainers; they're mostly on the stuff that matters less like well... Sleep/Wake related things, speakers and batteries, all of which are mostly useful for desktops and laptops.