There are several problems with the code and dump scenario:
* Open source contributors have to approach the codebase from a much more advanced, and often more burdened or rigid, state
* The mainline developers, who worked on the code before release, aren't necessarily used to, or open to, accepting contributions as if the project had been developed in the open from a much more primitive state.
* Sometimes the dump literally just means "here's the code", and isn't an indication that the project is looking for significant or lasting contributions at all.
* Sometimes when companies open source their stuff what they're really doing is putting it out to pasture... but this isn't always apparent upon release.
* Often the project isn't hosted on a neutral platform, like Github or the company still works on v2 in a private fork.
* Open source contributors have to approach the codebase from a much more advanced, and often more burdened or rigid, state
* The mainline developers, who worked on the code before release, aren't necessarily used to, or open to, accepting contributions as if the project had been developed in the open from a much more primitive state.
* Sometimes the dump literally just means "here's the code", and isn't an indication that the project is looking for significant or lasting contributions at all.
* Sometimes when companies open source their stuff what they're really doing is putting it out to pasture... but this isn't always apparent upon release.
* Often the project isn't hosted on a neutral platform, like Github or the company still works on v2 in a private fork.