This happens everywhere and I used to call it the “academics vs reality” fight.
Before everyone settled on Ansible or saltstack (or terraform) for config management/IaC, there was a holy war between configs system that were prescriptive- (that is, you write how things should be, the tool makes reality match your definition, full stop), vs tools that can examine how the world is and then convert that into a definition.
Many of those tools that came from large university networks or early supercomputer teams were staunchly against examining the existing world at all - why would you ever let anyone deploy something outside the definition?
Of course outside of academia when something breaks you go fix it, and if that means kludging something together to get it working again and then coming back around to make your definition match reality afterwards, well, that’s what you do, because otherwise your infrastructure is down and people are pissed off at you. But if you’ve only run a fiefdom of a campus / research network and your users are more nuisances than customers or otherwise don’t get a say in reliability, well then, sure, spend an extra hour fixing your definition before you bring your infra back up.
Google even enshrined this in their cloud! “Preemptible” servers used to have a 24-hour restart timer (unlike competitors where preemptible workloads ran until that capacity was needed by a non-preemptible customer, often for weeks or months) - for no other reason than that Google thought that anyone running preemptible workloads “should build their systems to be tolerant of daily restarts as a good practice” - completely ignoring reality. There though, they have customers not serfs (unlike a lot of their other monopolistic business divisions) and were forced to change their offering.
So it’s not just the FLOSS community that is this way, it’s idealism vs pragmatism overall.